Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

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
You are here

Document 62017TN0646

Case T-646/17: Action brought on 22 September 2017 — Addicion Sicav and Others v SRB

OJ C 392, 20.11.2017, p. 37–37 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

20.11.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/37

Action brought on 22 September 2017 — Addicion Sicav and Others v SRB

(Case T-646/17)

(2017/C 392/46)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicants: Addicion Sicav, SA (Madrid, Spain), Allocation Sicav, SA (Madrid), Fundación Rafael de Pinto (Madrid), Chart Inversiones Sicav, SA (Madrid) and Match Ten Inversiones Sicav, SA (Madrid) (represented by: M. Romero Rey and I. Salama Salama, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:

—

On the basis of Article 263 TFEU, annul Decision SRB/EES/2017/08 of the Single Resolution Board (SRB) of 7 June 2017 adopting a resolution scheme in respect of the Banco Popular Español, S.A.;

—

In accordance with Article 340(2) TFEU and Article 41(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, order the Single Resolution Board to pay compensation to the applicants for the harm suffered, in an amount corresponding to the nominal value of the bonds, updated at the date of resolution, and the related default interest accrued from that date up to the date the reimbursement will be made;

—

In accordance with Articles 133 and 134 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs of these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in Cases T-478/17, Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos v Single Resolution Board, T-481/17, Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno and SFL v Single Resolution Board, T-482/17, Comercial Vascongada Recalde v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-483/17, García Suárez and Others v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-484/17, Fidesban and Others v Single Resolution Board, T-497/17, Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission and Single Resolution Board, and T-498/17, Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda v Commission and Single Resolution Board.

Top