Official Journal of the European Union

EN

Series C

C/2023/24

9.10.2023

(Case T-430/23)

(C/2023/24)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: ABLV Bank AS (Riga, Latvia) (represented by: O. Behrends, lawyer)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—annul the SRB’s decision dated 30 September 2022 with respect to the applicant’s request for access to documents (the ‘original decision’), the decision of the SRB’s Appeal Panel dated 10 May 2023, to the extent that it contains adverse findings for the applicant, and the SRB’s negative reply pursuant to Article 8(3) of Regulation 1049/2001, (1) fifteen working days after the Appeal Panel decision;

—order the defendant to bear the applicant’s costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging that the SRB Appeal Panel erroneously assumes a power to reject with binding effect on the applicant any challenges to the original decision that it does not uphold.

2.Second plea in law, alleging that the SRB Appeal Panel and the SRB commit further related errors by violating Article 85(4) SRMR, (2) by assuming no time-limit for a new decision following a decision by the SRB Appeal Panel to remit the matter to the SRB, by delaying the original decision contrary to Regulation 1049/2001 and because of the SRB Appeal Panel’s exclusion of arguments of the applicant on the basis of alleged limitations of the competence of the SRB Appeal Panel.

3.Third plea in law, alleging that the SRB Appeal Panel erroneously rejected the ground as to the incompleteness of the list of documents.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging that the SRB Appeal Panel erroneously assumed a right of the SRB to refer the applicant to the ECB with respect to certain documents.

5.Fifth plea in law, alleging that the SRB Appeal Panel erroneously rejected the applicant’s request for a procedural order.

6.Sixth plea in law, alleging that the SRB Appeal Panel erroneously rejected the applicant’s request for access to the file and thereby violated its right pursuant to Article 41 of the Charter on Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

7.Seventh plea in law, alleging that the SRB Appeal Panel erroneously excluded considerations other than those pursuant Regulation 1049/2001.

(1) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).

(2) 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).

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/24/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

END OF DOCUMENT