This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62016TN0661
Case T-661/16: Action brought on 19 September 2016 — Credito Fondiario v CRU
Case T-661/16: Action brought on 19 September 2016 — Credito Fondiario v CRU
Case T-661/16: Action brought on 19 September 2016 — Credito Fondiario v CRU
OJ C 402, 31.10.2016, p. 59–61
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
31.10.2016 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 402/59 |
Action brought on 19 September 2016 — Credito Fondiario v CRU
(Case T-661/16)
(2016/C 402/71)
Language of the case: Italian
Parties
Applicant Credito Fondiario SpA (Rome, Italy) (represented by: F. Sciaudone, F. Iacovone, S. Frazzani and A. Neri, lawyers)
Defendant: Comitato di risoluzione unico
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
— |
annul the first and second decision of the Single Resolution Board; |
— |
declare Article 5(1)(f) of Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2015/63, on which the contested decisions are based, incompatible with the principles of equal treatment, proportionality and legal certainty recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; |
— |
declare Annex I to Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2015/63, on which the contested decisions are based, incompatible with the principles of equal treatment, proportionality and legal certainty recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; |
— |
declare Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2015/63, on which the contested decisions are based, incompatible with the principle of freedom to conduct a business recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; |
— |
order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The present action concerns decisions of the executive session of the Single Resolution Board SRB/ES/SRF/2016/06 of 15 April 2016 (first decision) and SRB/ES/SRF/2016/13 of 20 May 2016 (second decision) which determine, in so far as concerns the applicant, the ex ante contribution provided for by Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/63 supplementing Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ex ante contributions to resolution financing arrangements (OJ 2015 L 11, p. 44).
In support of the action, the applicant relies on seven pleas in law.
1. |
First plea in law: failure to notify the first and second decision
|
2. |
Second plea in law: infringement of the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU for failure to state reasons and infringement of the rule audi alteram partem in respect of decisions relating to ex ante contributions
|
3. |
Third plea in law: incorrect application of Article 5(1)(f) of Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2015/63.
|
4. |
Fourth plea in law: infringement of Article 4(1) and Article 6 of Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2015/63. Incorrect assessment of the risk profile of Credito Fondiario.
|
5. |
Fifth plea in law: infringement of Articles 20 and 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Equal treatment
|
6. |
Sixth plea in law: infringement of the principle of proportionality and legal certainty.
|
7. |
Seventh plea in law: infringement of Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Freedom to conduct a business
|