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 62022TN0527

    Case T-527/22: Action brought on 22 August 2022 — Sberbank of Russia v SRB

    OJ C 441, 21.11.2022, p. 22–22 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    21.11.2022   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 441/22

    Action brought on 22 August 2022 — Sberbank of Russia v SRB

    (Case T-527/22)

    (2022/C 441/29)

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Sberbank of Russia OAO (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: D. Rovetta, M. Campa, M. Pirovano, M. Moretto and V. Villante, lawyers)

    Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB)

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    annul the decision (SRB/EES/2022/19) on assessment of the conditions for resolution in respect of Sberbank Europe AG issued by the Single Resolution Board on 1 March 2022, together with the Valuation Report 1, issued by the Single Resolution Board on 27 February 2022;

    —

    order the Single Resolution Board to bear the costs of the proceedings.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

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

    1.

    First plea in law, alleging the infringement of essential procedural requirements.

    2.

    Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the obligation to state reasons, of Article 296 TFEU and of Article 41(2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and breach of the right to effective judicial protection and of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

    3.

    Third plea in law, alleging manifest error of assessment in the overall evaluation of the conditions related to the resolution scheme and breach of Articles 6, 14 and 18 of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014, (1) as well as infringement of the fundamental right to property and of the freedom to conduct a business.

    (1)  Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ 2014 L 225, p. 1).

    Top