This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011CJ0039
Summary of the Judgment
Summary of the Judgment
Keywords
Free movement of capital and liberalisation of payments — Restrictions — Severance funds — National legislation making the investment of their assets in units of investment funds established in another Member State subject to authorisation to market those units within the national territory — Not permissible — Justification — None
(Art. 63(1) TFEU)
Summary
Article 63(1) TFEU must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which does not permit a severance fund, or the undertaking for collective investment created by that severance fund to manage its assets, to invest those assets in units of an investment fund established in another Member State unless that investment fund has been authorised to market its units within the national territory.
The free movement of capital may be limited by national legislation only if this is justified by one of the reasons mentioned in Article 65 TFEU or by overriding reasons in the public interest. The need to guarantee the stability and security of the assets administered by an undertaking for collective investment created by a severance fund, in particular by the adoption of prudential rules, constitutes an imperative reason of public interest which is capable of justifying restrictions on the free movement of capital. However, legislation which requires an investment fund established in another Member State to undergo the procedure for authorisation to market its units within the national territory goes far beyond what is necessary to attain the objective of scrutiny pursued.
(see paras 28, 31, 32, 38, operative part)
Case C-39/11
VBV — Vorsorgekasse AG
v
Finanzmarktaufsichtsbehörde (FMA)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof)
‛Free movement of capital — Articles 63 TFEU and 65 TFEU — Severance funds — Investment of assets — Investment funds established in another Member State — Investment in such funds permitted only when they are authorised to market their units within the national territory’
Summary of the Judgment
Free movement of capital and liberalisation of payments — Restrictions — Severance funds — National legislation making the investment of their assets in units of investment funds established in another Member State subject to authorisation to market those units within the national territory — Not permissible — Justification — None
(Art. 63(1) TFEU)
Article 63(1) TFEU must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which does not permit a severance fund, or the undertaking for collective investment created by that severance fund to manage its assets, to invest those assets in units of an investment fund established in another Member State unless that investment fund has been authorised to market its units within the national territory.
The free movement of capital may be limited by national legislation only if this is justified by one of the reasons mentioned in Article 65 TFEU or by overriding reasons in the public interest. The need to guarantee the stability and security of the assets administered by an undertaking for collective investment created by a severance fund, in particular by the adoption of prudential rules, constitutes an imperative reason of public interest which is capable of justifying restrictions on the free movement of capital. However, legislation which requires an investment fund established in another Member State to undergo the procedure for authorisation to market its units within the national territory goes far beyond what is necessary to attain the objective of scrutiny pursued.
(see paras 28, 31, 32, 38, operative part)