OMT’s Inevitable Legality? Giorgio Monti (EUI) Two sets of considerations on the Advocate General’s Opinion delivered on 14 January 2015 in Case C-62/14, Gauweiler et al v Deutscher Bundestag. 1. Inevitable legality The first starts from the premise that there are certain cases when a court cannot but give one kind of answer. This can […]Read More..
News & Comments
We welcome short entries about relevant European or national developments for this News and Comments section. You are invited to use the contact form for this or to directly contact Thomas Beukers (firstname.lastname@example.org) or Viorica Vita (email@example.com).
On 16 June 2015 the Court of Justice of the EU has delivered its judgment in the preliminary reference by the German Constitutional Court on the ECB's OMT programme (C-62/14, Gauweiler e.a.). The Court has found that European law permits the OMT programme: it falls within the monetary policy mandate of the ECB, is proportionate, […]Read More..
On Wednesday 14 January 2015 Advocate General Cruz Villalon has issued his Opinion in the Gauweiler case on the compatibility of the ECB's OMT-programme with EU law. According to the Advocate General, the OMT-programme is a monetary policy measure compatible with the mandate of the ECB and the monetary financing prohibition of article 123 TFEU if […]Read More..
In his introductory statement, Member of the ECB Executive Board Yves Mersch focused on the European Court of Justice's judgment in the Gauweiler case of 15 June 2016, and on two points, which the Bundesverfassungsgericht had identified in its communication with the European Central Bank as being significant: 1) timeliness and modalities for the implementation […]Read More..
In a preliminary reference following the first reference ever by the Slovenian Constitutional Court (see the earlier comment by Samo Bardutzki) Advocate General Wahl of the European Court of Justice has published his Opinion (Case C‑526/14, Kotnik). According to Wahl the so-called Banking Communication of the European Commission on the application of state aid rules […]Read More..
20 September: ECJ judgments on the liability of EU institutions within the ESM and the legal nature of the Eurogroup (Ledra Advertising and Mallis Case)September 20, 2016
Both cases were started by a number of Cypriot account holders that suffered losses from the bank restructuring that followed from the Cypriot request for financial assistance from the ESM. In the Ledra Advertising case, the Grand Chamber of the Court established that the Commission and ECB can be liable for their actions under the […]Read More..
On May 16 the General Court decided on the interpretation of the concept 'significant entity' under the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM), following an action of annulment by the Landeskreditbank Baden-Württemberg — Förderbank, which is regarded as a significant entity by the European Central Bank (ECB). As a consequence the bank was subject solely to ECB supervision rather than shared […]Read More..
In its judgment of 7 October the General Court decided that the loss suffered in 2012 by private holders of Greek debt instruments in connection with the restructuring of the public debt of the Greek State is not attributable to the ECB, but to the economic risks ordinarily inherent in financial sector activities. By protecting […]Read More..
30 September 2015: General Court confirms there is no EU competence for unilateral member state decision not to pay back debts in state of necessityOctober 2, 2015
On Wednesday 30 September 2015 the General Court of the EU decided that the European citizens' initiative seeking to allow cancellation of the onerous public debt of countries in a state of necessity such as Greece can not be registered. On 6 September 2012 the European Commission refused to register Mr Anagnostakis' proposal for a […]Read More..