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 62018TN0197

    Case T-197/18: Action brought on 16 March 2018 — JV Voscf and Others v Council and Others

    OJ C 190, 4.6.2018, p. 34–34 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    4.6.2018   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 190/34

    Action brought on 16 March 2018 — JV Voscf and Others v Council and Others

    (Case T-197/18)

    (2018/C 190/57)

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicants: JV Voscf LTD (Limassol, Cyprus) and 9 others (represented by: P. Tridimas, Barrister, K. Kakoulli, P. Panayides and C. Pericleous, lawyers)

    Defendants: Council of the European Union, European Commission, European Central Bank, Eurogroup and European Union

    Form of order sought

    The applicants claim that the Court should:

    —

    order the defendants to pay the applicants the sums shown in the schedule annexed to this application plus interest accruing from 26 March 2013 until the judgment of the Court;

    —

    order the defendants to pay the costs.

    In the alternative, by way of subsidiary claim, the applicants request the Court to:

    —

    find that the European Union and/or the defendant institutions have incurred non-contractual liability;

    —

    determine the procedure to be followed in order to establish the recoverable loss actually suffered by the applicants; and

    —

    order the defendants to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    The applicants consider that the bail-in measures adopted by the Republic of Cyprus were introduced solely in order to implement measures adopted by the defendants and were also approved by the defendant institutions. The applicants consider that the bail-in scheme is a serious violation and in support of their action, they rely on four pleas in law.

    1.

    First plea in law, alleging violation of the right to property, as protected by Article 17(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention for the Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms.

    2.

    Second plea in law, alleging violation of the principle of proportionality.

    3.

    Third plea in law, alleging violation of the principle of protection of legitimate expectations.

    4.

    Fourth plea in law, alleging violation of the principle of non-discrimination.
    Top