EN C 22/20 Official Journal of the European Union 22 1 2020 58 Based on the review of the sample, we found that certain applicants have claimed that the necessary conditions for a non-contractual liability of the Union have been met We note that at this stage any predictions are complicated in light of the fact that the resolution legal framework is relatively new and creates a complex, specific and unprecedented legal system However, we did not find evidence that would contradict the assessment made by the Commission 59 In addition to cases relating to the resolution of BPE, the Commission was the subject of two court cases related to ex-ante contributions to the SRF In both cases the Commission is the defendant, together with the SRB While one case is pending at the GC, the second case is a preliminary ruling, pending at the CJ We agree with the CommissionŐs assessment that disclosing contingent liabilities for these cases is not necessary 60 We note that the CommissionŐs legal service has an appropriate process in place to assess the probability for each legal case individually and to provide reasons and supporting arguments The process provides the accounting officer with the necessary assessments to disclose any contingent liabilities or provisions stemming from legal cases PartIII: ContingentliabilitiesoftheCouncil 61 We received a representation letter from the accounting officer of the Council stating that at 31 December 2018 the Council had no contingent liabilities arising due to the performance of its tasks under the SRM Regulation 62 Based on its assessment of a resolution scheme proposed by the SRB, the Commission may object to the resolution scheme If the objection is related to the criterion of public interest or requests a material modification of the use of the SRF, the Commission must propose the change to the Council (see paragraph 55) To date, the Council has not been involved in any resolution decisions However, it was the subject of one legal case relating to BPE at the end of 2017 The case was ruled inadmissible insofar as it was directed at the Council (48) in 2018 Thus, no contingent liabilities arise for the Council CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 63 We note that any predictions at this stage concerning the outcome of the judicial proceedings against the SRB, the Commission, and the Council are complicated by the fact that the resolution legal framework is relatively new and creates a complex, specific and unprecedented legal system However, we did not find evidence that would contradict the assessments made by the SRB, the Commission, and the Council on any contingent liabilities arising as a result of the performance of their tasks under the SRM Regulation (see paragraphs 26, 46, 58, 59 and 62 respectively) Nevertheless, we have found certain weaknesses that require management attention 64 For its 2018 final accounts, the SRBŐs legal service assessed the likelihood of an outflow of economic resources as a result of the pending BPE cases as ÔremoteŐ and did not disclose any contingent liabilities However, the assessment as ÔremoteŐ was not supported by any reasons or supporting arguments (see paragraph 25) In comparison, the Commission assessed the probabilities related to individual judicial proceedings and provided reasons for its assessment (see paragraph 60) Recommendation 1 Internal assessment of the likelihood of an outflow of resources 65 In comparison to that provided in previous years, the SRB has improved its accounting presentation of contingent liabilities related to ex-ante contributions to the Fund The SRB has adjusted its approach in order to provide a more precise estimate of the contingent liabilities arising from legal cases related to ex-ante contributions (see paragraph 46) When assessing the likelihood of an outflow of economic resources as a result of legal proceedings, the SRB should include adequate reasons and supporting arguments per individual case Timeframe: Presentation of the SRB accounts for 2019 (48) Order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 14 June 2018 Ń Cambra Abaurrea v Parliament and Others (Case T-553/17) 
Drfr uppstr inga ansvarsfrbindelser fr rdet. SLUTSATSER OCH REKOMMENDATIONER 63. Vi noterar att alla prognoser i detta skede avseende utgngen av de rttsliga frfarandena mot Gemensamma resolutionsnmnden, kommissionen och rdet kompliceras av det faktum att den rttsliga ramen fr resolutioner r relativt ny och skapar ett komplext, specifikt och helt nytt rttssystem.