EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62023TN0551

Case T-551/23: Action brought on 1 September 2023 — Baltic International Bank v ECB

OJ C, C/2023/148, 16.10.2023, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/148/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/148/oj

European flag

Official Journal
of the European Union

EN

Series C


C/2023/148

16.10.2023

Action brought on 1 September 2023 — Baltic International Bank v ECB

(Case T-551/23)

(C/2023/148)

Language of the case: Latvian

Parties

Applicant: Baltic International Bank, SE (Riga, Latvia) (represented by: M. Supe and V. Supe, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul Decision ECB-SSM-2023-LV-2 WHD-2022-0014 of the European Central Bank of 3 July 2023 on the withdrawal of the supervisited entity’s authorisation as a credit instititution;

order the European Central Bank to pay the costs of the proceedings incurred by Baltic International Bank SE.

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the European Central Bank erred in its assessment by not taking account of the fact that the Finanšu un kapitāla tirgus komisija (Financial and Capital Markets Commission) has failed to fulfil its obligation under Article 196(4) of the Latvijas Republikas Kredītiestāžu likums (Law on Credit Institutions of the Republic of Latvia) to issue regulations that establish the criteria for significant infringements of provisions in the field of the prevention of money laundering and the financing of terrorism proliferation.

2.

Second plea in law, founded on the obligation to carry out a careful and impartial assessment of all the aspects of the case.

3.

Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the duty to state reasons under Article 296 TFEU, which corresponds to the right set out in Article 41(2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and which safeguards the right to an effective remedy set out in Article 47 of the Charter.

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of good administration, which corresponds to the right to be heard set out in Article 41(2)(a) of the Charter and a person’s right to have access to his or her file under Article 41(2)(b) thereof, and which safeguards the right to an effective remedy set out in Article 47 of the Charter.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/148/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)


Top