Portigon v CRU (Economic and monetary union - Banking union - Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) - - Judgment) French Text [2024] EUECJ T-360/21 (29 May 2024)

Portigon v CRU (Economic and monetary union - Banking union - Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) - - Judgment) French Text [2024] EUECJ T-360/21 (29 May 2024)

The Court held that Regulation No 806/2014, Directive 2014/59/EU, and Delegated Regulation 2015/63 were validly adopted under Article 114(1) TFEU, as their objective and content were to improve the functioning of the internal market by harmonizing resolution mechanisms and funding. Ex ante contributions are not fiscal measures but sectoral levies with an insurance logic, directly benefiting the financial sector and not falling under Article 114(2) TFEU. The Commission did not exceed its delegated powers in specifying risk adjustment criteria, nor was it required to exempt institutions with low risk or in wind-down. The SRB's calculation method and inclusion of Portigon's liabilities were...

Citation
[2024] EUECJ T-360/21
Parties
Applicant: Portigon AG; Defendant: Conseil de résolution unique (CRU); Intervener: Parlement européen; Intervener: Conseil de l’Union européenne; Intervener: Commission européenne
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
29 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Annulment Action (article 263 Tfeu) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Single Resolution Mechanism (srm), Single Resolution Fund (srf), Ex Ante Contributions, Exception of Illegality, Legal Basis of EU Acts, Equality of Treatment, Margin of Discretion, Obligation to State Reasons
European Union Law Banking and Finance Law Administrative Law Single Resolution Mechanism (srm) Single Resolution Fund (srf) Ex Ante Contributions Exception of Illegality Legal Basis of EU Acts +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Portigon AG

Applicant

Conseil de résolution unique (CRU)

Defendant

Parlement européen

Intervener

Conseil de l’Union européenne

Intervener

Commission européenne

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Annulment Action (article 263 Tfeu) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the SRB decision on ex ante contributions for 2021 is lawful as regards Portigon AG
  2. 2 Whether Regulation No 806/2014, Directive 2014/59/EU, and Delegated Regulation 2015/63 are invalid due to lack of legal basis or breach of higher norms
  3. 3 Whether the calculation of contributions violated principles of equality, risk adjustment, or procedural rights

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that Regulation No 806/2014, Directive 2014/59/EU, and Delegated Regulation 2015/63 were validly adopted under Article 114(1) TFEU, as their objective and content were to improve the functioning of the internal market by harmonizing resolution mechanisms and funding. Ex ante contributions are not fiscal measures but sectoral levies with an insurance logic, directly benefiting the financial sector and not falling under Article 114(2) TFEU. The Commission did not exceed its delegated powers in specifying risk adjustment criteria, nor was it required to exempt institutions with low risk or in wind-down. The SRB's calculation method and inclusion of Portigon's liabilities were...

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • The application for annulment is dismissed.
  • Portigon AG is ordered to bear its own costs and those of the SRB.