Official Journal of the European Union

C series

—

C/2024/6053

(Joined Cases C-498/22 to C-500/22, Novo Banco and Others)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions - Directive 2001/24/EC - Articles 3 and 6 - Reorganisation measure taken in respect of a credit institution - Transfer of the obligations and responsibilities of that credit institution to a ‘bridge bank’ prior to the bringing of a legal action seeking payment of a claim held against that credit institution - Transfer back to the same credit institution of certain of those obligations and responsibilities - Law of the Member State where the proceedings concerned were brought (lex concursus) - Effects of a reorganisation measure in other Member States - Mutual recognition - Effects of a failure to comply with the obligation to publish the reorganisation measure - Articles 17, 21, 38 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Right to property - Effective judicial protection - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13/EC - Article 6(1) - Unfair terms - Principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations - Whether the ‘bridge bank’ can be sued)

(C/2024/6053)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Novo Banco SA – Sucursal en España, Banco de Portugal, Fundo de Resolução

Defendants: C.F.O. (C-498/22), J.M.F.T., M.H.D.S. (C-499/22), Proyectos, Obras y Servicios de Badajoz SL (C-500/22)

Operative part of the judgment

1.Article 3(2) and Article 6 of Directive 2001/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions, read in the light of Article 21(2) and the first paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding, where the publication provided for in Article 6(1) of that directive has not taken place, the recognition, by a court of a Member State other than the home Member State, of the effects of a reorganisation measure adopted in respect of a credit institution before proceedings were brought before that court, which transferred the obligations and responsibilities of that credit institution, in part, to a bridge bank.

2.Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/24, read in the light of the first paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and of the principle of legal certainty, must be interpreted as meaning that individuals cannot rely on the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations against a bridge bank, a body governed by private law with no powers going beyond the ordinary law, set up in the context of reorganisation measures in respect of a credit institution of which those individuals were initially customers, in order to hold that bridge bank liable in respect of pre-contractual and contractual obligations related to contracts previously concluded with that credit institution. The mere fact that that credit institution was temporarily controlled by a public authority, with a view to its privatisation, cannot turn that credit institution, which operates on the competitive market for banking and financial services, into a national administrative authority.

3.Article 6(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, read in the light of Article 38 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, Article 17 of that Charter and of the principle of legal certainty, must be interpreted as not precluding, in principle, the recognition, in the host Member State, of the effects of reorganisation measures adopted in the home Member State under Directive 2001/24, which provide for the setting up of a bridge bank and the retention in the liabilities of the bank subject to those measures of the obligation to pay sums payable in connection with pre-contractual or contractual liability.

—

(1) OJ C 482, 19.12.2022.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6053/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

—

—