Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62021CN0822

    Case C-822/21: Action brought on 30 December 2021 — Republic of Latvia v Kingdom of Sweden

    OJ C 119, 14.3.2022, p. 25–26 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
    OJ C 119, 14.3.2022, p. 9–9 (GA)

    Date of document:
    30/12/2021
    Date lodged:
    30/12/2021
    Author:
    Court of Justice
    Form:
    Judicial information
    Authentic language:
    Swedish
    Type of procedure:
    Action for annulment
    Link
    Select all documents mentioning this document
    Case affecting:
    • request to establish failure to fulfil an obligation 12016M004 paragraph 3
    • request to establish failure to fulfil an obligation 32014L0049 article 14 paragraph 3
    Instruments cited in case law:
    Link

    14.3.2022   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 119/25

    Action brought on 30 December 2021 — Republic of Latvia v Kingdom of Sweden

    (Case C-822/21)

    (2022/C 119/33)

    Language of the case: Swedish

    Parties

    Applicant: Republic of Latvia (represented by: K. Pommere, J. Davidoviča and I. Romanovska)

    Defendant: Kingdom of Sweden

    Form of order sought

    The Republic of Latvia claims that the Court should:

    —

    hold that the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations under:

    —

    Article 14(3) of Directive 2014/49/EU, (1) in so far as, by refusing to transfer to the Latvian DGF (Deposit Guarantee Fund) the contributions paid by the Latvian branch of Nordea Bank AB, calculated for the contribution period in accordance with Article 14(3) of Directive 2014/49/EU, the Kingdom of Sweden has acted contrary to the objective pursued by that directive and has not ensured the effectiveness of the provisions of that directive;

    —

    Article 4(3) TEU, in so far as, by refusing to transfer to the Lavian DGF the contributions paid by the Latvian branch of Nordea Bank AB, calculated for the contribution period in accordance with Article 14(3) of Directive 2014/49/EU, the Kingdom of Sweden has adversely affected the integration of the single market and in so doing undermines the mutual trust between EU Member States, which is a pre-requisite for cross-border integration.

    If the Court finds that the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 14(3) of Directive 2014/49/EU and Article 4(3) TEU:

    —

    order the Kingdom of Sweden to put an end to the infringement by having the Swedish DGF transfer to the Latvian DGF the full amount of the contributions paid by the Latvian branch of Nordea Bank AB, calculated for the contribution period in accordance with Article 14(3) of Directive 2014/49/EU;

    —

    if Article 14(3) of Directive 2014/49/EU is to be interpreted strictly, specify its compatibility with the objective of Directive 2014/49/EU and the obligation of the Swedish DGF to transfer to the Lavian DGF the contributions paid by the Latvian branch of Nordea Bank AB;

    —

    order the Kingdom of Sweden to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    In support of its action, the applicant puts forward pleas in law alleging an infringement of Article 14(3) of Directive 2014/49/EU and an infringement of the EU Treaty (the principle of sincere cooperation).

    1.

    By refusing to transfer to the Lavian DGF the contributions paid by the Latvian branch of Nordea Bank AB, calculated for the contribution period in accordance with Article 14(3) of Directive 2014/49/EU, the Kingdom of Sweden has acted contrary to the objective pursued by Directive 2014/49/EU.

    2.

    By refusing to transfer to the Lavian DGF the contributions paid by the Latvian branch of Nordea Bank AB, calculated for the contribution period in accordance with Article 14(3) of Directive 2014/49/EU, the Kingdom of Sweden has adversely affected the integration of the single market and in so doing undermines the mutual trust between EU Member States, which is a pre-requisite for cross-border integration. Accordingly, the Kingdom of Sweden has infringed Article 4(3) TEU.

    3.

    The Republic of Latvia submits that, by refusing to transfer the contributions paid and in formally justifying that refusal by the date on which those contributions were actually paid, the Kingdom of Sweden has infringed Directive 2014/49/EU and that that infringement compromises the achievement of EU objectives and strips Latvia of the right to contributions which compensate the risk associated with deposits guaranteed by a credit institution transferred under its responsibility, resulting in a breach of the principle of sincere cooperation enshrined in Article 4(3) TEU and the achievement of the objectives of Directive 2014/49/EU being compromised.

    (1)  Directive 2014/49/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on deposit guarantee schemes (OJ 2014 L 173, p. 149).

    Top