{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-557-24-p","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-557-24-p)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-11-02","fingerprint":"ewai:eu:f6410a","proof":"sha256:1177464b22ca94779edab9caf74bb6ec15f31a49cd50d8eb889125834c966bcf","jurisdiction":"eu","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"eu:c-557-24-p","jurisdiction":"eu","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"62024CJ0557","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber)","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"21 May 2026 (\n *1\n )","paragraphs":["para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22"]},{"title":"Judgment","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"1","paragraphs":["para_25"]},{"title":"I.   Legal context","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"A.   European Union law","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"1.\n  \n Regulation (EU) No 575/2013","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"2","paragraphs":["para_30","para_31"]},{"title":"(a)","paragraphs":["para_33"]},{"title":"(b)","paragraphs":["para_35"]},{"title":"(c)","paragraphs":["para_37"]},{"title":"(d)","paragraphs":["para_39"]},{"title":"(e)","paragraphs":["para_41"]},{"title":"2.\n  \n Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"3","paragraphs":["para_44"]},{"title":"4","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Article 4 of that regulation provides:","paragraphs":["para_47","para_48"]},{"title":"(d)","paragraphs":["para_50"]},{"title":"(e)","paragraphs":["para_52"]},{"title":"(f)","paragraphs":["para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57"]},{"title":"5","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Article 9(1) and (2) of that regulation provides as follows:","paragraphs":["para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63"]},{"title":"6","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Article 16 of that regulation is worded as follows:","paragraphs":["para_66"]},{"title":"(a)","paragraphs":["para_68"]},{"title":"(b)","paragraphs":["para_70"]},{"title":"(c)","paragraphs":["para_72","para_73"]},{"title":"(a)","paragraphs":["para_75"]},{"title":"(b)","paragraphs":["para_77"]},{"title":"(c)","paragraphs":["para_79"]},{"title":"(d)","paragraphs":["para_81"]},{"title":"(e)","paragraphs":["para_83"]},{"title":"(f)","paragraphs":["para_85"]},{"title":"(g)","paragraphs":["para_87"]},{"title":"(h)","paragraphs":["para_89"]},{"title":"(i)","paragraphs":["para_91"]},{"title":"(j)","paragraphs":["para_93"]},{"title":"(k)","paragraphs":["para_95"]},{"title":"(l)","paragraphs":["para_97"]},{"title":"(m)","paragraphs":["para_99"]},{"title":"3.\n  \n Directive 2013/36","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"7","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"According to Article 1 of Directive 2013/36:","paragraphs":["para_103"]},{"title":"(a)","paragraphs":["para_105"]},{"title":"(b)","paragraphs":["para_107"]},{"title":"(c)","paragraphs":["para_109"]},{"title":"(d)","paragraphs":["para_111"]},{"title":"8","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Article 142 of that directive provides:","paragraphs":["para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117"]},{"title":"4.\n  \n Directive 2014/59/EU","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"9","paragraphs":["para_120"]},{"title":"10","paragraphs":["para_122","para_123","para_124"]},{"title":"11","paragraphs":["para_126","para_127"]},{"title":"12","paragraphs":["para_129","para_130"]},{"title":"5.\n  \n Directive (EU) 2017/1132","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"13","paragraphs":["para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137"]},{"title":"B.   Italian law","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"14","paragraphs":["para_140"]},{"title":"15","paragraphs":["para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145","para_146","para_147","para_148"]},{"title":"16","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"Article 56 of that law provides:","paragraphs":["para_151","para_152"]},{"title":"17","paragraphs":["para_154"]},{"title":"18","paragraphs":["para_156"]},{"title":"19","paragraphs":["para_158"]},{"title":"20","paragraphs":["para_160"]},{"title":"21","paragraphs":["para_162"]},{"title":"22","paragraphs":["para_164"]},{"title":"II.   Background to the dispute","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"23","paragraphs":["para_167"]},{"title":"24","paragraphs":["para_169"]},{"title":"25","paragraphs":["para_171"]},{"title":"26","paragraphs":["para_173"]},{"title":"27","paragraphs":["para_175"]},{"title":"28","paragraphs":["para_177"]},{"title":"29","paragraphs":["para_179"]},{"title":"30","paragraphs":["para_181"]},{"title":"31","paragraphs":["para_183"]},{"title":"32","paragraphs":["para_185"]},{"title":"33","paragraphs":["para_187"]},{"title":"34","paragraphs":["para_189"]},{"title":"35","paragraphs":["para_191"]},{"title":"36","paragraphs":["para_193"]},{"title":"37","paragraphs":["para_195"]},{"title":"38","paragraphs":["para_197"]},{"title":"39","paragraphs":["para_199"]},{"title":"40","paragraphs":["para_201"]},{"title":"III.   The procedure before the General Court and the judgment under appeal","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"41","paragraphs":["para_204"]},{"title":"42","paragraphs":["para_206"]},{"title":"43","paragraphs":["para_208","para_209","para_210","para_211","para_212","para_213","para_214","para_215","para_216","para_217","para_218","para_219","para_220","para_221","para_222","para_223","para_224"]},{"title":"44","paragraphs":["para_226"]},{"title":"45","paragraphs":["para_228"]},{"title":"46","paragraphs":["para_230"]},{"title":"47","paragraphs":["para_232"]},{"title":"48","paragraphs":["para_234"]},{"title":"49","paragraphs":["para_236"]},{"title":"50","paragraphs":["para_238"]},{"title":"51","paragraphs":["para_240","para_241","para_242","para_243","para_244","para_245","para_246"]},{"title":"52","paragraphs":["para_248"]},{"title":"53","paragraphs":["para_250"]},{"title":"54","paragraphs":["para_252"]},{"title":"55","paragraphs":["para_254"]},{"title":"56","paragraphs":["para_256"]},{"title":"57","paragraphs":["para_258"]},{"title":"58","paragraphs":["para_260"]},{"title":"59","paragraphs":["para_262"]},{"title":"60","paragraphs":["para_264"]},{"title":"61","paragraphs":["para_266"]},{"title":"62","paragraphs":["para_268"]},{"title":"63","paragraphs":["para_270"]},{"title":"64","paragraphs":["para_272"]},{"title":"65","paragraphs":["para_274"]},{"title":"66","paragraphs":["para_276"]},{"title":"67","paragraphs":["para_278"]},{"title":"68","paragraphs":["para_280"]},{"title":"69","paragraphs":["para_282"]},{"title":"70","paragraphs":["para_284"]},{"title":"71","paragraphs":["para_286"]},{"title":"72","paragraphs":["para_288"]},{"title":"73","paragraphs":["para_290"]},{"title":"74","paragraphs":["para_292"]},{"title":"75","paragraphs":["para_294"]},{"title":"IV.   Forms of order sought","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"76","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"The appellants claim that the Court should:","paragraphs":["para_298","para_299","para_300","para_301","para_302","para_303","para_304","para_305"]},{"title":"77","paragraphs":["para_307"]},{"title":"78","paragraphs":["para_309"]},{"title":"V.   The application for the proceedings to be stayed","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"79","paragraphs":["para_312"]},{"title":"80","paragraphs":["para_314"]},{"title":"VI.   The appeal","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"A.   Admissibility","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"1.\n  \n Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"81","paragraphs":["para_319"]},{"title":"82","paragraphs":["para_321"]},{"title":"2.\n  \n Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"83","paragraphs":["para_324"]},{"title":"84","paragraphs":["para_326"]},{"title":"85","paragraphs":["para_328"]},{"title":"86","paragraphs":["para_330"]},{"title":"87","paragraphs":["para_332"]},{"title":"88","paragraphs":["para_334"]},{"title":"B.   Substance","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"89","paragraphs":["para_337"]},{"title":"1.\n  \n The first ground of appeal","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"90","paragraphs":["para_340"]},{"title":"(a)\n  \n The first part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"91","paragraphs":["para_344"]},{"title":"92","paragraphs":["para_346"]},{"title":"93","paragraphs":["para_348"]},{"title":"94","paragraphs":["para_350"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"95","paragraphs":["para_353"]},{"title":"96","paragraphs":["para_355"]},{"title":"97","paragraphs":["para_357"]},{"title":"98","paragraphs":["para_359"]},{"title":"99","paragraphs":["para_361"]},{"title":"100","paragraphs":["para_363"]},{"title":"101","paragraphs":["para_365"]},{"title":"102","paragraphs":["para_367"]},{"title":"103","paragraphs":["para_369"]},{"title":"(b)\n  \n The second part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"104","paragraphs":["para_373"]},{"title":"105","paragraphs":["para_375"]},{"title":"106","paragraphs":["para_377"]},{"title":"107","paragraphs":["para_379"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"108","paragraphs":["para_382"]},{"title":"109","paragraphs":["para_384"]},{"title":"110","paragraphs":["para_386"]},{"title":"111","paragraphs":["para_388"]},{"title":"112","paragraphs":["para_390"]},{"title":"(c)\n  \n The third part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"113","paragraphs":["para_394"]},{"title":"114","paragraphs":["para_396"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"115","paragraphs":["para_399"]},{"title":"116","paragraphs":["para_401"]},{"title":"117","paragraphs":["para_403"]},{"title":"118","paragraphs":["para_405"]},{"title":"119","paragraphs":["para_407"]},{"title":"120","paragraphs":["para_409"]},{"title":"(d)\n  \n The fourth part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"121","paragraphs":["para_413"]},{"title":"122","paragraphs":["para_415"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"123","paragraphs":["para_418"]},{"title":"124","paragraphs":["para_420"]},{"title":"(e)\n  \n The fifth part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"125","paragraphs":["para_424"]},{"title":"126","paragraphs":["para_426"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"127","paragraphs":["para_429"]},{"title":"128","paragraphs":["para_431"]},{"title":"129","paragraphs":["para_433"]},{"title":"130","paragraphs":["para_435"]},{"title":"2.\n  \n The second ground of appeal","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"131","paragraphs":["para_438"]},{"title":"(a)\n  \n The first and third parts","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"132","paragraphs":["para_442"]},{"title":"133","paragraphs":["para_444"]},{"title":"134","paragraphs":["para_446"]},{"title":"135","paragraphs":["para_448"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"136","paragraphs":["para_451"]},{"title":"137","paragraphs":["para_453"]},{"title":"138","paragraphs":["para_455"]},{"title":"139","paragraphs":["para_457"]},{"title":"140","paragraphs":["para_459"]},{"title":"141","paragraphs":["para_461"]},{"title":"142","paragraphs":["para_463"]},{"title":"143","paragraphs":["para_465"]},{"title":"144","paragraphs":["para_467"]},{"title":"145","paragraphs":["para_469"]},{"title":"146","paragraphs":["para_471"]},{"title":"147","paragraphs":["para_473"]},{"title":"148","paragraphs":["para_475"]},{"title":"149","paragraphs":["para_477"]},{"title":"(b)\n  \n The second part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"150","paragraphs":["para_481"]},{"title":"151","paragraphs":["para_483"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"152","paragraphs":["para_486"]},{"title":"153","paragraphs":["para_488"]},{"title":"154","paragraphs":["para_490"]},{"title":"(c)\n  \n The fourth part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"155","paragraphs":["para_494"]},{"title":"156","paragraphs":["para_496"]},{"title":"157","paragraphs":["para_498"]},{"title":"158","paragraphs":["para_500"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"159","paragraphs":["para_503"]},{"title":"160","paragraphs":["para_505"]},{"title":"161","paragraphs":["para_507"]},{"title":"162","paragraphs":["para_509"]},{"title":"163","paragraphs":["para_511"]},{"title":"164","paragraphs":["para_513"]},{"title":"165","paragraphs":["para_515"]},{"title":"166","paragraphs":["para_517"]},{"title":"167","paragraphs":["para_519"]},{"title":"168","paragraphs":["para_521"]},{"title":"169","paragraphs":["para_523"]},{"title":"170","paragraphs":["para_525"]},{"title":"171","paragraphs":["para_527"]},{"title":"(d)\n  \n The fifth part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"172","paragraphs":["para_531"]},{"title":"173","paragraphs":["para_533"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"174","paragraphs":["para_536"]},{"title":"175","paragraphs":["para_538"]},{"title":"176","paragraphs":["para_540"]},{"title":"177","paragraphs":["para_542"]},{"title":"178","paragraphs":["para_544"]},{"title":"(e)\n  \n The sixth part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"179","paragraphs":["para_548"]},{"title":"180","paragraphs":["para_550"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"181","paragraphs":["para_553"]},{"title":"182","paragraphs":["para_555"]},{"title":"183","paragraphs":["para_557"]},{"title":"184","paragraphs":["para_559"]},{"title":"185","paragraphs":["para_561"]},{"title":"186","paragraphs":["para_563"]},{"title":"187","paragraphs":["para_565"]},{"title":"188","paragraphs":["para_567"]},{"title":"3.\n  \n The third plea in law","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"189","paragraphs":["para_570"]},{"title":"(a)\n  \n The first part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the appellants","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"190","paragraphs":["para_574"]},{"title":"191","paragraphs":["para_576"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"192","paragraphs":["para_579"]},{"title":"193","paragraphs":["para_581"]},{"title":"194","paragraphs":["para_583"]},{"title":"195","paragraphs":["para_585"]},{"title":"196","paragraphs":["para_587"]},{"title":"197","paragraphs":["para_589"]},{"title":"198","paragraphs":["para_591"]},{"title":"(b)\n  \n The second part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"199","paragraphs":["para_595"]},{"title":"200","paragraphs":["para_597"]},{"title":"201","paragraphs":["para_599"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"202","paragraphs":["para_602"]},{"title":"203","paragraphs":["para_604"]},{"title":"204","paragraphs":["para_606"]},{"title":"205","paragraphs":["para_608"]},{"title":"206","paragraphs":["para_610"]},{"title":"207","paragraphs":["para_612"]},{"title":"(c)\n  \n The third part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"208","paragraphs":["para_616"]},{"title":"209","paragraphs":["para_618"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"210","paragraphs":["para_621"]},{"title":"211","paragraphs":["para_623"]},{"title":"212","paragraphs":["para_625"]},{"title":"213","paragraphs":["para_627"]},{"title":"4.\n  \n The fourth ground of appeal","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(a)\n  \n Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"214","paragraphs":["para_631"]},{"title":"215","paragraphs":["para_633"]},{"title":"216","paragraphs":["para_635"]},{"title":"217","paragraphs":["para_637"]},{"title":"(b)\n  \n Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"218","paragraphs":["para_640"]},{"title":"219","paragraphs":["para_642"]},{"title":"220","paragraphs":["para_644"]},{"title":"221","paragraphs":["para_646"]},{"title":"222","paragraphs":["para_648"]},{"title":"223","paragraphs":["para_650"]},{"title":"224","paragraphs":["para_652"]},{"title":"225","paragraphs":["para_654"]},{"title":"226","paragraphs":["para_656"]},{"title":"227","paragraphs":["para_658"]},{"title":"228","paragraphs":["para_660"]},{"title":"229","paragraphs":["para_662"]},{"title":"230","paragraphs":["para_664"]},{"title":"231","paragraphs":["para_666"]},{"title":"5.\n  \n The fifth ground of appeal","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(a)\n  \n Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"232","paragraphs":["para_670"]},{"title":"233","paragraphs":["para_672"]},{"title":"234","paragraphs":["para_674"]},{"title":"235","paragraphs":["para_676"]},{"title":"(b)\n  \n Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"236","paragraphs":["para_679"]},{"title":"237","paragraphs":["para_681"]},{"title":"238","paragraphs":["para_683"]},{"title":"239","paragraphs":["para_685"]},{"title":"240","paragraphs":["para_687"]},{"title":"241","paragraphs":["para_689"]},{"title":"242","paragraphs":["para_691"]},{"title":"243","paragraphs":["para_693"]},{"title":"244","paragraphs":["para_695"]},{"title":"245","paragraphs":["para_697"]},{"title":"246","paragraphs":["para_699"]},{"title":"247","paragraphs":["para_701"]},{"title":"248","paragraphs":["para_703"]},{"title":"249","paragraphs":["para_705"]},{"title":"250","paragraphs":["para_707"]},{"title":"251","paragraphs":["para_709"]},{"title":"6.\n  \n The sixth ground of appeal","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"252","paragraphs":["para_712"]},{"title":"(a)\n  \n The first part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"253","paragraphs":["para_716"]},{"title":"254","paragraphs":["para_718"]},{"title":"255","paragraphs":["para_720"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"256","paragraphs":["para_723"]},{"title":"257","paragraphs":["para_725"]},{"title":"258","paragraphs":["para_727"]},{"title":"259","paragraphs":["para_729"]},{"title":"260","paragraphs":["para_731"]},{"title":"261","paragraphs":["para_733"]},{"title":"262","paragraphs":["para_735"]},{"title":"263","paragraphs":["para_737"]},{"title":"(b)\n  \n The second part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"264","paragraphs":["para_741"]},{"title":"265","paragraphs":["para_743"]},{"title":"266","paragraphs":["para_745"]},{"title":"267","paragraphs":["para_747"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"268","paragraphs":["para_750"]},{"title":"269","paragraphs":["para_752"]},{"title":"270","paragraphs":["para_754"]},{"title":"271","paragraphs":["para_756"]},{"title":"272","paragraphs":["para_758"]},{"title":"273","paragraphs":["para_760"]},{"title":"7.\n  \n The seventh ground of appeal","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"274","paragraphs":["para_763"]},{"title":"(a)\n  \n The first part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"275","paragraphs":["para_767"]},{"title":"276","paragraphs":["para_769"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"277","paragraphs":["para_772"]},{"title":"278","paragraphs":["para_774"]},{"title":"279","paragraphs":["para_776"]},{"title":"280","paragraphs":["para_778"]},{"title":"281","paragraphs":["para_780"]},{"title":"282","paragraphs":["para_782"]},{"title":"(b)\n  \n The second part","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"283","paragraphs":["para_786"]},{"title":"284","paragraphs":["para_788"]},{"title":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"285","paragraphs":["para_791"]},{"title":"286","paragraphs":["para_793"]},{"title":"287","paragraphs":["para_795"]},{"title":"288","paragraphs":["para_797"]},{"title":"289","paragraphs":["para_799"]},{"title":"VII.   The action before the General Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"290","paragraphs":["para_802"]},{"title":"291","paragraphs":["para_804","para_805"]},{"title":"1.\n  \n Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"292","paragraphs":["para_808"]},{"title":"293","paragraphs":["para_810"]},{"title":"2.\n  \n Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"294","paragraphs":["para_813"]},{"title":"295","paragraphs":["para_815"]},{"title":"296","paragraphs":["para_817"]},{"title":"297","paragraphs":["para_819"]},{"title":"298","paragraphs":["para_821"]},{"title":"299","paragraphs":["para_823"]},{"title":"300","paragraphs":["para_825"]},{"title":"301","paragraphs":["para_827"]},{"title":"302","paragraphs":["para_829","para_830"]},{"title":"1.\n  \n Arguments of the parties","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"303","paragraphs":["para_833"]},{"title":"304","paragraphs":["para_835"]},{"title":"305","paragraphs":["para_837"]},{"title":"306","paragraphs":["para_839"]},{"title":"307","paragraphs":["para_841"]},{"title":"2.\n  \n Findings of the Court","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"308","paragraphs":["para_844"]},{"title":"309","paragraphs":["para_846"]},{"title":"310","paragraphs":["para_848"]},{"title":"311","paragraphs":["para_850"]},{"title":"312","paragraphs":["para_852"]},{"title":"313","paragraphs":["para_854"]},{"title":"314","paragraphs":["para_856"]},{"title":"315","paragraphs":["para_858"]},{"title":"316","paragraphs":["para_860"]},{"title":"317","paragraphs":["para_862"]},{"title":"318","paragraphs":["para_864"]},{"title":"VIII.   Costs","paragraphs":[]},{"title":"319","paragraphs":["para_867"]},{"title":"320","paragraphs":["para_869"]},{"title":"321","paragraphs":["para_871"]},{"title":"On those grounds, the Court (Fifth Chamber) hereby:","paragraphs":["para_873","para_874","para_875"]},{"title":"Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;","paragraphs":["para_877","para_878","para_879","para_880","para_881","para_882"]}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"62024CJ0557","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber)","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"21 May 2026 (\n *1\n )","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"(Appeal – Non-contractual liability – Economic and monetary policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Decisions taken by the European Central Bank (ECB) concerning Banca Carige SpA – Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals – Principle of the protection of legitimate expectations – Conflict of interest – Proportionality – Equal treatment – Right to property – Grounds of the General Court’s judgment)","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"In Case C‑557/24 P,","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, brought on 14 August 2024,","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"Malacalza Investimenti Srl , established in Genoa (Italy),","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"Vittorio Malacalza , residing in Genoa (Italy),","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"represented by L. Boggio, S.M. Carbone, and A. D’Angelo, avvocati,","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"appellants,","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"the other parties to the proceedings being:","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"European Central Bank (ECB) , represented by G. Marafioti, A. Pizzolla and E. Yoo, acting as Agents,","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"defendant at first instance,","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"European Commission , represented by P.A. Messina, A. Steiblytė and D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents,","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"intervener at first instance,","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"composed of M.L. Arastey Sahún, President of the Chamber, J. Passer, E. Regan, D. Gratsias (Rapporteur) and B. Smulders, Judges,","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"Advocate General: M. Campos Sánchez-Bordona,","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"Registrar: A. Calot Escobar,","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"having regard to the written procedure,","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 13 November 2025,","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"gives the following","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"Judgment","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"1","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"By their appeal, Malacalza Investimenti Srl and Mr Vittoria Malacalza seek to have set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 5 June 2024, Malacalza Investimenti and Malacalza v ECB ( T‑134/21 , EU:T:2024:362 ; ‘the judgment under appeal’), by which the General Court dismis …","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"I.   Legal context","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"A.   European Union law","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"1.\n  \n Regulation (EU) No 575/2013","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"2","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"Under the first paragraph of Article 1 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 ( OJ 2013 L 176, p. 1 ):","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"‘This Regulation lays down uniform rules concerning general prudential requirements that institutions supervised under Directive 2013/36/EU [of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institu …","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"(a)","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"own funds requirements relating to entirely quantifiable, uniform and standardised elements of credit risk, market risk, operational risk and settlement risk;","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"(b)","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"requirements limiting large exposures;","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"(c)","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"after the delegated act referred to in Article 460 has entered into force, liquidity requirements relating to entirely quantifiable, uniform and standardised elements of liquidity risk;","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"(d)","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"reporting requirements related to points (a), (b) and (c) and to leverage;","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"(e)","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"public disclosure requirements.’","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"2.\n  \n Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"3","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions ( OJ 2013 L 287, p. 63 ) defines, in Article 2(9) thereof, the single supervisory mechanism (SSM) as ‘the system of financial supervision composed by the ECB and national competent authorities of participating Member States as described in Article 6 of this Regulation’.","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"4","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"Article 4 of that regulation provides:","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"‘1.   Within the framework of Article 6, the ECB shall, in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article, be exclusively competent to carry out, for prudential supervisory purposes, the following tasks in relation to all credit institutions established in the participating Member States:","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"…","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"(d)","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"to ensure compliance with the acts referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 4(3), which impose prudential requirements on credit institutions in the areas of own funds requirements, securitisation, large exposure limits, liquidity, leverage, and reporting and public disclosure of information on those matters;","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"(e)","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"to ensure compliance with the acts referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 4(3), which impose requirements on credit institutions to have in place robust governance arrangements, including the fit and proper requirements for the persons responsible for the management of credit institutions, …","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"(f)","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"to carry out supervisory reviews, including where appropriate in coordination with [the European Banking Authority (EBA)], stress tests and their possible publication, in order to determine whether the arrangements, strategies, processes and mechanisms put in place by credit institutions and the own …","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"…","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"3.   For the purpose of carrying out the tasks conferred on it by this Regulation, and with the objective of ensuring high standards of supervision, the ECB shall apply all relevant Union law, and where this Union law is composed of Directives, the national legislation transposing those Directives. …","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"…’","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"5","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"Article 9(1) and (2) of that regulation provides as follows:","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"‘1.   For the exclusive purpose of carrying out the tasks conferred on it by Articles 4(1), 4(2) and 5(2), the ECB shall be considered, as appropriate, the competent authority or the designated authority in the participating Member States as established by the relevant Union law.","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"For the same exclusive purpose, the ECB shall have all the powers and obligations set out in this Regulation. It shall also have all the powers and obligations, which competent and designated authorities shall have under the relevant Union law, unless otherwise provided for by this Regulation. In particular, the ECB shall have the powers listed in Sections 1 and 2 of this Chapter.","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"…","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"2.   The ECB shall exercise the powers referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article in accordance with the acts referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 4(3). In the exercise of their respective supervisory and investigatory powers, the ECB and national competent authorities shall cooperate closely.’","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"6","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"Article 16 of that regulation is worded as follows:","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"‘1.   For the purpose of carrying out its tasks referred to in Article 4(1) and without prejudice to other powers conferred on the ECB, the ECB shall have the powers set out in paragraph 2 of this Article to require any credit institution, financial holding company or mixed financial holding company in participating Member States to take the necessary measures at an early stage to address relevant problems in any of the following circumstances:","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"(a)","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"the credit institution does not meet the requirements of the acts referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 4(3);","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"(b)","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"the ECB has evidence that the credit institution is likely to breach the requirements of the acts referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 4(3) within the next 12 months;","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"(c)","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"based on a determination, in the framework of a supervisory review in accordance with point (f) of Article 4(1), that the arrangements, strategies, processes and mechanisms implemented by the credit institution and the own funds and liquidity held by it do not ensure a sound management and coverage of its risks.","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"2.   For the purposes of Article 9(1), the ECB shall have, in particular, the following powers:","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"(a)","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"to require institutions to hold own funds in excess of the capital requirements laid down in the acts referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 4(3) related to elements of risks and risks not covered by the relevant [European] Union acts;","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"(b)","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"to require the reinforcement of the arrangements, processes, mechanisms and strategies;","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"(c)","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"to require institutions to present a plan to restore compliance with supervisory requirements pursuant to the acts referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 4(3) and set a deadline for its implementation, including improvements to that plan regarding scope and deadline;","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"(d)","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"to require institutions to apply a specific provisioning policy or treatment of assets in terms of own funds requirements;","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"(e)","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"to restrict or limit the business, operations or network of institutions or to request the divestment of activities that pose excessive risks to the soundness of an institution;","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"(f)","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"to require the reduction of the risk inherent in the activities, products and systems of institutions;","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"(g)","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"to require institutions to limit variable remuneration as a percentage of net revenues when it is inconsistent with the maintenance of a sound capital base;","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"(h)","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"to require institutions to use net profits to strengthen own funds;","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"(i)","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"to restrict or prohibit distributions by the institution to shareholders, members or holders of Additional Tier 1 instruments where the prohibition does not constitute an event of default of the institution;","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"(j)","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"to impose additional or more frequent reporting requirements, including reporting on capital and liquidity positions;","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"(k)","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"to impose specific liquidity requirements, including restrictions on maturity mismatches between assets and liabilities;","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"(l)","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"to require additional disclosures;","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"(m)","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"to remove at any time members from the management body of credit institutions who do not fulfil the requirements set out in the acts referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 4(3).’","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"3.\n  \n Directive 2013/36","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"7","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"According to Article 1 of Directive 2013/36:","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"‘This Directive lays down rules concerning:","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"(a)","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"access to the activity of credit institutions and investment firms (collectively referred to as “institutions”);","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"(b)","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"supervisory powers and tools for the prudential supervision of institutions by competent authorities;","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"(c)","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"the prudential supervision of institutions by competent authorities in a manner that is consistent with the rules set out in Regulation [No 575/2013];","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"(d)","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"publication requirements for competent authorities in the field of prudential regulation and supervision of institutions.’","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"8","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"Article 142 of that directive provides:","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"‘1.   Where an institution fails to meet its combined buffer requirement, it shall prepare a capital conservation plan and submit it to the competent authority no later than five working days after it identified that it was failing to meet that requirement, unless the competent authority authorises a longer delay up to 10 days.","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"…","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"3.   The competent authority shall assess the capital conservation plan, and shall approve the plan only if it considers that the plan, if implemented, would be reasonably likely to conserve or raise sufficient capital to enable the institution to meet its combined buffer requirements within a period which the competent authority considers appropriate.","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"…’","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"4.\n  \n Directive 2014/59/EU","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"9","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"Point 21 of Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment firms and amending Council Directive 82/891/EEC, and Directives 2001/24/EC, 2002/47/EC, 2004/25 …","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"10","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"Article 27 of that directive, headed ‘Early intervention measures’, provides, in paragraph 1 thereof:","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"‘1. Where [a credit institution or investment firm] infringes or, due, inter alia, to a rapidly deteriorating financial condition, including deteriorating liquidity situation, increasing level of leverage, non-performing loans or concentration of exposures, as assessed on the basis of a set of trigg …","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"…’","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"11","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"Article 28 of Directive 2014/59, entitled ‘Removal of senior management and management body’, provides:","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"‘Where there is a significant deterioration in the financial situation of an institution or where there are serious infringements of law, of regulations or of the statutes of the institution, or serious administrative irregularities, and other measures taken in accordance with Article 27 are not suf …","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"12","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"Paragraph 1 of Article 29 of that directive, headed ‘Temporary administrator’, is worded as follows:","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"‘Where replacement of the senior management or management body as referred to in Article 28 is deemed to be insufficient by the competent authority to remedy the situation, Member States shall ensure that competent authorities may appoint one or more temporary administrators to the institution. Comp …","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"5.\n  \n Directive (EU) 2017/1132","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"13","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"Article 72(1) and (4) of Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 relating to certain aspects of company law ( OJ 2017 L 169, p. 46 ) provides:","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"‘1.   Whenever the capital is increased by consideration in cash, the shares shall be offered on a pre-emptive basis to shareholders in proportion to the capital represented by their shares.","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"…","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"4.   The right of pre-emption may not be restricted or withdrawn by the statutes or instrument of incorporation. This may, however, be done by decision of the general meeting. …","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"…’","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"B.   Italian law","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"14","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"Article 53(1)(da) of the decreto legislativo n. 385 – Testo unico delle leggi in materia bancaria e creditizia (Legislative Decree No 385 consolidating the laws on banking and credit) of 1 September 1993 (GURI No 230 of 30 September 1993, Ordinary Supplement No 92; ‘the Consolidated Law on Banking’) …","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"15","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"Article 53a(1)(d) of that law provides that, where the situation so requires, the supervisory authority may adopt specific measures in respect of one or more banks or the banking system as a whole. Those measures may include:","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"restricting the bank’s activities or geographical structure;","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"prohibiting it from engaging in certain transactions, including corporate transactions, and from distributing profits or other elements of capital, as well as – in the case of financial instruments that could be included in capital for supervisory purposes – prohibiting the bank from paying interest;","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"setting limits on the total amount of the variable part of remuneration within the bank, where this is necessary to maintain a sound capital base, and, in the case of banks that have been granted emergency public funding interventions, setting limits on the total remuneration of corporate officers.","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"16","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"Article 56 of that law provides:","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"‘1.   The Bank of Italy shall ensure that amendments to the statutes of banks do not conflict with sound and prudent management.","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"2.   The procedure for registration in the companies’ register may be initiated only if the verification provided for in paragraph 1 is established.’","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"17","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"Article 67(1)(e) of the Consolidated Law on Banking provides that, for the exercise of consolidated supervision, the supervisory authority is to issue to the parent company, by means of general measures, information concerning the banking group as a whole or its components, on capital adequacy, risk …","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"18","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"In accordance with Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of that law, the Bank of Italy may implement the early intervention measures referred to in that text where, as a result of a rapid deterioration in the situation of the bank concerned or of the group of which it forms part, it finds there to be or foresees, inter alia, an infringement of Regulation No 575/2013 and of Title II of Directive 2014/65.","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"19","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"In accordance with Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(b) and Article 70 of that law, the supervisory authority may place an institution under temporary administration in the event of serious infringements of laws or regulations, of serious irregularities in the management of the credit institution, where t …","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"20","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"Article 69 noviesdecies of the Consolidated Law on Banking confers on the supervisory authority the power to request, where the conditions laid down in Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of that law are satisfied, that a credit institution or the parent company of a banking group implement, even in part, the restructuring plan adopted, prepare a plan to negotiate debt restructuring with all or some of the creditors or, where appropriate, modify their corporate form.","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"21","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"It follows from Article 71(6) of the Consolidated Law on Banking that in order to be able to perform their duties, temporary administrators must have a number of characteristics, one of which being that they must be free from conflicts of interest.","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"22","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"In accordance with Article 72(5) of that law, the company action for damages against the administrative and supervisory bodies that have been dissolved, is to be brought, for the duration of the temporary administration, by the temporary administrators.","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"II.   Background to the dispute","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"23","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"The background to the dispute, which is set out in paragraphs 2 to 25 of the judgment under appeal, may, for the purposes of the present proceedings, be summarised as follows.","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"24","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"Banca Carige was a credit institution established in Italy, which was listed on the stock exchange and was subject to direct prudential supervision by the ECB from 2014 onwards, in accordance with Regulation No 1024/2013. The appellants held shares in Banca Carige and Mr Malacalza was also a member and vice-president of its board of directors from 31 March 2016 to 3 August 2018.","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"25","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"On 23 April 2015, in order to remedy the capital shortfall that had been identified by the full assessment carried out by the ECB in the course of 2014, the extraordinary general meeting of Banca Carige’s shareholders approved a capital increase of EUR 850 million.","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"26","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"By Decision ECB/SSM/2016-F1T87K3OQ2OV1UORLH26/26 of 9 December 2016, the ECB adopted an early intervention measure in respect of Banca Carige (‘the early intervention measure’). That measure consisted of requesting that the bank submit, by 28 February 2017, a strategic plan and an operational plan to reduce the issue of non-performing loans, with a clear indication of the measures to be taken and the schedule to be followed in order to achieve that objective.","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"27","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"In September 2017, in order to meet the objectives set by the early intervention measure, Banca Carige’s board of directors approved a recapitalisation plan which included, inter alia, a capital increase of EUR 560 million to be implemented by the end of 2017. Following the approval of the prospectu …","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"28","paragraph_id":"para_176"},{"text":"On 28 December 2017, the ECB notified Banca Carige of its decision establishing the prudential requirements in its respect for 2018. Subsequently, Banca Carige tried unsuccessfully to increase its own funds in order to meet the applicable requirements.","paragraph_id":"para_177"},{"text":"29","paragraph_id":"para_178"},{"text":"Those failures exacerbated tensions within Banca Carige’s board of directors over how to remedy non-compliance with own funds requirements and how to implement the recapitalisation plan approved in September 2017. Those disagreements led to a number of resignations, including that of Mr Malacalza, w …","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"30","paragraph_id":"para_180"},{"text":"In view of Banca Carige’s failures in its attempt to place its capital instruments on the market, by Decision ECB-SSM-2018-ITCAR-6 of 14 September 2018 (‘the own funds decision’), the ECB refused to approve the capital conservation plan drawn up by Banca Carige and asked it to submit and obtain appr …","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"31","paragraph_id":"para_182"},{"text":"In order to respond to that request, Banca Carige’s board of directors adopted, on 12 November 2018, a capital strengthening plan involving two stages, namely, first, the issue of Class 2 subordinated bonds and, next, an increase in capital subject to shareholder approval.","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"32","paragraph_id":"para_184"},{"text":"The first stage was carried out by means of a bond subscription in the amount, first, of EUR 318.2 million by the Fondo interbancario di tutela dei depositi (Interbank Deposit Protection Fund, Italy) (‘the FITD’) through its Voluntary Intervention Fund and, second, of EUR 1.8 million by Banco di Desio e della Brianza, a bank established in Italy.","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"33","paragraph_id":"para_186"},{"text":"As part of the second stage, an extraordinary general meeting of Banca Carige’s shareholders was convened on 22 December 2018 to approve a capital increase by exchange of subordinated bonds for newly issued shares, the objective being to strengthen Tier 1 capital. However, the latter proposal was no …","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"34","paragraph_id":"para_188"},{"text":"Following those events, on 23 December 2018, Banca Carige announced in a press release that the vice-chair of its board of directors and another member of that board had resigned with immediate effect. On 2 January 2019, in another press release, it announced the resignation, with effect from that d …","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"35","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"In the meantime, on 1 January 2019, the ECB had decided to place Banca Carige under temporary administration (‘the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration’) in accordance with the provisions of the Consolidated Law on Banking. That decision led to, first, the dissolution of Ban …","paragraph_id":"para_191"},{"text":"36","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"On 2 January 2019, the adoption of the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration was announced by means of a press release, and the trading of securities issued or guaranteed by Banca Carige was suspended by the Italian National Companies and Stock Exchange Commission during the …","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"37","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"Following a reassessment of the conditions on the basis of which the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration had been taken, that measure was extended three times – on 29 March, 30 September and 20 December 2019 – in order to stabilise Banca Carige’s situation and to allow for conclusion of the operation to strengthen the capital base.","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"38","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"On 9 August 2019, Banca Carige, Cassa Centrale Banca – Credito Cooperativo Italiano SpA, the parent company of a group of Italian credit institutions, the FITD and the FITD’s voluntary intervention fund signed a framework agreement defining the characteristics of a business plan which provided, in p …","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"39","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"On 20 September 2019, an extraordinary general meeting of Banca Carige’s shareholders approved that capital increase. Malacalza Investimenti did not attend that meeting.","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"40","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"On 31 January 2020, after the implementation of that capital increase, a new board of directors and a new supervisory board were elected at the ordinary general meeting of Banca Carige’s shareholders and the temporary directors and the supervisory committee transferred, on the same date, the management of Banca Carige to the newly elected bodies.","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"III.   The procedure before the General Court and the judgment under appeal","paragraph_id":"para_202"},{"text":"41","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"By application lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 3 March 2021, the applicants brought an action seeking (i) that the ECB be ordered to pay, first, Malacalza Investimenti the sum of EUR 870525670 and, second, Mr Malacalza the sum of EUR 9544022, or any other greater or lesser amount whic …","paragraph_id":"para_204"},{"text":"42","paragraph_id":"para_205"},{"text":"By decision of 21 July 2021, the European Commission was granted leave to intervene in support of the form of order sought by the ECB.","paragraph_id":"para_206"},{"text":"43","paragraph_id":"para_207"},{"text":"In paragraph 28 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court found that the appellants called into question the non-contractual liability of the ECB in respect of the following eight alleged instances of unlawful conduct:","paragraph_id":"para_208"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_209"},{"text":"first, the sufficiently serious breach by the ECB of Italian law when it failed to intervene to rectify the allegedly misleading statements about the soundness of Banca Carige, made by directors of that bank;","paragraph_id":"para_210"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_211"},{"text":"second, the sufficiently serious breach by the ECB of EU rules in its relations with Banca Carige’s board of directors;","paragraph_id":"para_212"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_213"},{"text":"third, the sufficiently serious breach by the ECB of Italian law as regards the approval, on 18 September 2019, of an increase in capital contrary to the pre-emption rights provided for in Banca Carige’s statutes;","paragraph_id":"para_214"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_215"},{"text":"fourth, the sufficiently serious breach by the ECB of Italian law in relation to the appointment of temporary administrators who allegedly had a conflict of interest;","paragraph_id":"para_216"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_217"},{"text":"fifth, the sufficiently serious breach by the ECB, when adopting the early intervention measure, of various rules and principles;","paragraph_id":"para_218"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_219"},{"text":"sixth, the sufficiently serious breach by the ECB, in the own funds decision, of the principle of proportionality as a result of the imposition on Banca Carige of a period of time that was too short to allow it to comply with the own funds requirements imposed on it;","paragraph_id":"para_220"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_221"},{"text":"seventh, the sufficiently serious breach by the ECB of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations as a result of the assurances given to shareholders as to the situation of Banca Carige;","paragraph_id":"para_222"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_223"},{"text":"eighth, the sufficiently serious breach by the ECB of the shareholders’ right to property as a result of the significant reduction in the value of their shareholdings in Banca Carige.","paragraph_id":"para_224"},{"text":"44","paragraph_id":"para_225"},{"text":"After recalling, in paragraph 34 of the judgment under appeal, the case-law according to which, in order for the European Union to incur non-contractual liability towards individuals, three cumulative conditions must be satisfied relating to (i) the unlawfulness of the conduct attributable to the EU …","paragraph_id":"para_226"},{"text":"45","paragraph_id":"para_227"},{"text":"As regards the nature of the rules which may give rise to non-contractual liability on the part of the European Union, the General Court recalled, in paragraphs 36 and 37 of the judgment under appeal, that, according to its case-law, a rule of law is intended to confer rights on individuals where it …","paragraph_id":"para_228"},{"text":"46","paragraph_id":"para_229"},{"text":"As regards the type of infringement required in order for the European Union to incur non-contractual liability, the General Court reviewed, in paragraphs 38 to 45 of the judgment under appeal, the relevant case-law and concluded, in paragraph 46 of that judgment, that it followed therefrom that, in …","paragraph_id":"para_230"},{"text":"47","paragraph_id":"para_231"},{"text":"The General Court examined in turn the eight instances of unlawful conduct raised by the appellants and recalled in paragraph 43 of the present judgment.","paragraph_id":"para_232"},{"text":"48","paragraph_id":"para_233"},{"text":"As regards the first instance of unlawful conduct, the General Court noted, in paragraph 59 of the judgment under appeal, that the appellants claimed that, by failing to rectify the allegedly misleading statements concerning the soundness of Banca Carige made by directors of that bank, the ECB infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, Article 53(1)(da), Article 53a(1)(d) and Article 67(1)(e) of the Consolidated Law on Banking.","paragraph_id":"para_234"},{"text":"49","paragraph_id":"para_235"},{"text":"In that regard, the General Court observed, in paragraph 68 of the judgment under appeal, that the first and third of those provisions impose on the ECB a general obligation to publish categories of information in the public interest, namely to ensure the smooth functioning and stability of the mark …","paragraph_id":"para_236"},{"text":"50","paragraph_id":"para_237"},{"text":"As regards Article 53a(1)(d) of the Consolidated Law on Banking, the General Court held, in paragraph 74 of the judgment under appeal, that it appeared, in the light of its wording, that that provision was irrelevant when determining whether the ECB was under the obligation to correct statements on …","paragraph_id":"para_238"},{"text":"51","paragraph_id":"para_239"},{"text":"As regards the second instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, the General Court noted, in paragraph 76 of the judgment under appeal, that the appellants claimed that the ECB had infringed Articles 4 and 16 of Regulation No 1024/2013:","paragraph_id":"para_240"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_241"},{"text":"by conferring with Mr Modiano and Mr Innocenzi with a view to their resigning, with effect as from 2 January 2019, which had caused Banca Carige’s board of directors to be disqualified and thus paved the way for that institution to be placed under temporary administration,","paragraph_id":"para_242"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_243"},{"text":"by seeking to limit the powers of Banca Carige’s board of directors to those of ratifying the decisions taken by the managing director at the meeting of 16 February 2018 and during successive exchanges between Mr Malacalza, Ms Nouy, the Chair of the ECB’s Supervisory Board, and Mr Quintana, a member of the ECB’s Directorate-General for Micro-Prudential Supervision, and","paragraph_id":"para_244"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_245"},{"text":"by concealing from the board of directors for several months the extent of the difficulty faced by Banca Carige in terms of capital, and by informing it only, on 21 June 2018, of the content of a letter which the ECB had nonetheless sent on 4 June 2018 to the managing director.","paragraph_id":"para_246"},{"text":"52","paragraph_id":"para_247"},{"text":"After having analysed, in paragraphs 79 to 84 of the judgment under appeal, Articles 4 and 16 of Regulation No 1024/2013, the General Court held, in paragraphs 85 and 86 of that judgment, that, since they are not intended to confer rights on individuals, those provisions cannot form the basis of a c …","paragraph_id":"para_248"},{"text":"53","paragraph_id":"para_249"},{"text":"As regards the third instance of unlawful conduct, the General Court noted, in paragraph 87 of the judgment under appeal, that the appellants alleged that the ECB had infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, Article 56 of the Consolidated Law on Banking by having approved, on 18 September 2019, a capital increase contrary to the right of pre-emption granted to shareholders by Banca Carige’s articles of association.","paragraph_id":"para_250"},{"text":"54","paragraph_id":"para_251"},{"text":"In that regard, it is apparent from paragraphs 92 and 93 of the judgment under appeal that the General Court considered that the verification to be carried out pursuant to Article 56 of the Consolidated Law on Banking must not relate to the compatibility of the proposed amendment to the statutes wit …","paragraph_id":"para_252"},{"text":"55","paragraph_id":"para_253"},{"text":"As for the fourth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, the General Court noted, in paragraph 95 of the judgment under appeal, that the appellants submitted that the ECB had infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, Article 71(6) of the Consolidated Law on Banking by appointing, a …","paragraph_id":"para_254"},{"text":"56","paragraph_id":"para_255"},{"text":"In that regard, the General Court held, in paragraph 104 of the judgment under appeal, that Article 71(6) of the Consolidated Law on Banking was intended to confer rights on individuals.","paragraph_id":"para_256"},{"text":"57","paragraph_id":"para_257"},{"text":"Nevertheless, the General Court found, in paragraphs 108 and 109 of the judgment under appeal, that the decision to place the bank under temporary administration had not been based on ‘serious irregularities’ -allegedly- committed by the former management bodies of Banca Carige, but had been based o …","paragraph_id":"para_258"},{"text":"58","paragraph_id":"para_259"},{"text":"As regards the fifth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, the General Court found, in paragraph 118 of the judgment under appeal, that the appellants raised six complaints in that regard. It is apparent from paragraph 119 of that judgment that, by the first complaint, the appellants …","paragraph_id":"para_260"},{"text":"59","paragraph_id":"para_261"},{"text":"It is apparent from paragraph 130 of the judgment under appeal that, by the second complaint, the appellants claimed that the ECB had infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, Article 69 noviesdecies of the Consolidated Law on Banking by imposing on Banca Carige, in the early intervention measure …","paragraph_id":"para_262"},{"text":"60","paragraph_id":"para_263"},{"text":"In that regard, it follows from paragraphs 134 and 138 of the judgment under appeal that the General Court held that Article 69 noviesdecies of the Consolidated Law on Banking merely gave the supervisory authority the power to request that credit institutions prepare or implement a plan to negotiate …","paragraph_id":"para_264"},{"text":"61","paragraph_id":"para_265"},{"text":"It is apparent from paragraphs 140 and 141 of the judgment under appeal that the third complaint alleged, in essence, that the early intervention measure was adopted in serious infringement of Article 16(1)(b) of Regulation No 1024/2013. The General Court noted, in paragraphs 142 and 143 of that jud …","paragraph_id":"para_266"},{"text":"62","paragraph_id":"para_267"},{"text":"In paragraph 144 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court noted that, by the fourth complaint, the appellants claimed that the ECB had infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, the principle of equal treatment by imposing on Banca Carige, in the context of the early intervention measure, m …","paragraph_id":"para_268"},{"text":"63","paragraph_id":"para_269"},{"text":"As regards the fifth complaint, the General Court noted, in paragraph 154 of the judgment under appeal, that the appellants claimed that the ECB had infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, the principle of proportionality by imposing on Banca Carige an obligation that causes an immediate write-down of the loans that it had granted and gave rise to considerable losses for the bank, even though less radical measures were conceivable.","paragraph_id":"para_270"},{"text":"64","paragraph_id":"para_271"},{"text":"In that regard, the General Court recalled, in paragraph 155 of the judgment under appeal, that the principle of proportionality was capable of conferring rights on individuals. However, on the basis of an analysis, carried out in paragraphs 160 to 164 of that judgment, of the reasons justifying the …","paragraph_id":"para_272"},{"text":"65","paragraph_id":"para_273"},{"text":"Furthermore, in paragraphs 168 to 174 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court examined and rejected the sixth complaint raised by the appellants in the context of the fifth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, by which the appellants requested the General Court to find, inci …","paragraph_id":"para_274"},{"text":"66","paragraph_id":"para_275"},{"text":"It is apparent from paragraph 175 of the judgment under appeal that, in the context of the sixth instance of unlawful conduct, the appellants complained that the ECB had imposed on Banca Carige, in the own funds decision, a period of time that was too short to enable Banca Carige to comply with the …","paragraph_id":"para_276"},{"text":"67","paragraph_id":"para_277"},{"text":"The General Court reviewed, in paragraphs 181 to 183 of the judgment under appeal, the grounds of the own funds decision and concluded, in paragraphs 184 to 186 of that judgment, that, first, the ECB had been entitled to consider, in view of the real risk that Banca Carige would not be able to resto …","paragraph_id":"para_278"},{"text":"68","paragraph_id":"para_279"},{"text":"In paragraph 187 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court noted that, in the context of the seventh instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, the appellants put forward three complaints relating to the alleged sufficiently serious breach by the ECB of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations.","paragraph_id":"para_280"},{"text":"69","paragraph_id":"para_281"},{"text":"As a preliminary point, the General Court recalled, in paragraphs 189 to 191 of the judgment under appeal, the case-law according to which (i) the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations is a general principle of EU law intended to confer rights on individuals, (ii) the possibility of …","paragraph_id":"para_282"},{"text":"70","paragraph_id":"para_283"},{"text":"It is in the light of those considerations that the General Court assessed the three complaints put forward by the appellants. As is apparent from paragraph 193 of the judgment under appeal, by the first of those complaints, the appellants complained that the ECB had failed to intervene in order to correct allegedly misleading statements made by Banca Carige’s directors concerning the financial soundness of that bank.","paragraph_id":"para_284"},{"text":"71","paragraph_id":"para_285"},{"text":"In that regard, the General Court noted, in paragraph 196 of the judgment under appeal, first, that the ECB’s failure to intervene to correct allegedly misleading statements could not be regarded as the provision by the ECB of assurances as to the conduct which it intended to adopt vis-à-vis Banca C …","paragraph_id":"para_286"},{"text":"72","paragraph_id":"para_287"},{"text":"As is apparent from paragraphs 198 to 202 of the judgment under appeal, the second complaint, by which the appellants claimed that the ECB had infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations by making positive assessments of the capital increas …","paragraph_id":"para_288"},{"text":"73","paragraph_id":"para_289"},{"text":"For the reasons set out in paragraphs 203 to 207 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court also rejected as inadmissible the third complaint, by which the appellants claimed that the ECB had infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations …","paragraph_id":"para_290"},{"text":"74","paragraph_id":"para_291"},{"text":"Last, the General Court analysed, in paragraphs 208 to 215, the appellants’ arguments relating to the eighth instance of unlawful conduct, alleging that the ECB had infringed their right to property, in that it had caused, by its acts and omissions, a significant reduction in the value of their shar …","paragraph_id":"para_292"},{"text":"75","paragraph_id":"para_293"},{"text":"Therefore, the General Court concluded, in paragraphs 216 and 217 of the judgment under appeal, that none of the instances of unlawful conduct raised by the appellants was capable of giving rise to non-contractual liability on the part of the ECB within the meaning of the third paragraph of Article …","paragraph_id":"para_294"},{"text":"IV.   Forms of order sought","paragraph_id":"para_295"},{"text":"76","paragraph_id":"para_296"},{"text":"The appellants claim that the Court should:","paragraph_id":"para_297"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_298"},{"text":"set aside the judgment under appeal;","paragraph_id":"para_299"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_300"},{"text":"refer the case back to the General Court; and","paragraph_id":"para_301"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_302"},{"text":"in the alternative, give judgment itself on the action and uphold their claims made therein; and","paragraph_id":"para_303"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_304"},{"text":"order the ECB and the Commission to pay the costs.","paragraph_id":"para_305"},{"text":"77","paragraph_id":"para_306"},{"text":"The ECB contends that the Court should dismiss the appeal as inadmissible or, in the alternative, as unfounded and, in both cases, order the appellants to pay the costs. In the further alternative, should the appeal be upheld and the judgment under appeal set aside, the ECB requests the Court of Justice to refer the case back to the General Court.","paragraph_id":"para_307"},{"text":"78","paragraph_id":"para_308"},{"text":"The Commission contends that the Court should dismiss the appeal on the ground that it is in part inadmissible or ineffective and entirely without foundation and order the appellants to pay the costs.","paragraph_id":"para_309"},{"text":"V.   The application for the proceedings to be stayed","paragraph_id":"para_310"},{"text":"79","paragraph_id":"para_311"},{"text":"By letter lodged at the Registry of the Court of Justice on 9 December 2025, the appellants requested the Court, should it intend to depart from the Opinion of the Advocate General who had proposed that the judgment under appeal be set aside and the case referred back to the General Court, to stay t …","paragraph_id":"para_312"},{"text":"80","paragraph_id":"para_313"},{"text":"The Court, after hearing the Advocate General, considers that there is no need to stay the proceedings in the present case, with the result that the request for a stay of proceedings must be dismissed.","paragraph_id":"para_314"},{"text":"VI.   The appeal","paragraph_id":"para_315"},{"text":"A.   Admissibility","paragraph_id":"para_316"},{"text":"1.\n  \n Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_317"},{"text":"81","paragraph_id":"para_318"},{"text":"The ECB contends that the appeal is inadmissible. It submits that the appellants do not specify the errors of law which they complain that the General Court made, do not identify with sufficient precision the elements which the General Court allegedly distorted, merely repeat their arguments put forward at first instance and rely on new pleas in law, not raised before the General Court, which alter the subject matter of the dispute.","paragraph_id":"para_319"},{"text":"82","paragraph_id":"para_320"},{"text":"The appellants dispute the ECB’s arguments and consider that their appeal is admissible.","paragraph_id":"para_321"},{"text":"2.\n  \n Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_322"},{"text":"83","paragraph_id":"para_323"},{"text":"It follows from the second subparagraph of Article 256(1) TFEU, the first paragraph of Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and Article 168(1)(d) and Article 169(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice that an appeal must indicate precisely the contes …","paragraph_id":"para_324"},{"text":"84","paragraph_id":"para_325"},{"text":"In particular, a ground of appeal supported by an argument that is not sufficiently clear and precise to enable the Court to exercise its powers of judicial review, in particular because essential elements on which the ground of appeal relies are not indicated sufficiently coherently and intelligibl …","paragraph_id":"para_326"},{"text":"85","paragraph_id":"para_327"},{"text":"Furthermore, it follows from the second subparagraph of Article 256(1) TFEU and the first paragraph of Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union that the General Court has exclusive jurisdiction, first, to establish the facts, except where the substantive inaccuracy of …","paragraph_id":"para_328"},{"text":"86","paragraph_id":"para_329"},{"text":"In the present case, it should be noted that, as a general rule and subject to the individual analysis of the grounds and arguments put forward by the appellants, the arguments developed in the appeal allow the grounds of the judgment under appeal covered and the errors alleged against the General Court to be identified, with the result that that appeal cannot be rejected from the outset as inadmissible.","paragraph_id":"para_330"},{"text":"87","paragraph_id":"para_331"},{"text":"As for the ECB’s argument that the appellants repeat arguments which they have already put forward before the General Court, it is sufficient to bear in mind that, in accordance with settled case-law, where an appellant challenges the interpretation or application of EU law by the General Court, the …","paragraph_id":"para_332"},{"text":"88","paragraph_id":"para_333"},{"text":"Consequently, the pleas of inadmissibility raised by the ECB against the appeal as a whole must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_334"},{"text":"B.   Substance","paragraph_id":"para_335"},{"text":"89","paragraph_id":"para_336"},{"text":"In support of their appeal, the appellants rely on seven grounds alleging (i) breach of the general principles of the protection of legitimate expectations, proportionality, equal treatment, prohibition of abuse of rights and protection of property, infringement or distortion of Article 53(1)(da) an …","paragraph_id":"para_337"},{"text":"1.\n  \n The first ground of appeal","paragraph_id":"para_338"},{"text":"90","paragraph_id":"para_339"},{"text":"The first ground of appeal is divided into five parts.","paragraph_id":"para_340"},{"text":"(a)\n  \n The first part","paragraph_id":"para_341"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_342"},{"text":"91","paragraph_id":"para_343"},{"text":"The appellants contest paragraphs 187 to 207 of the judgment under appeal, relating to the seventh instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB. They claim that, before the General Court, they had argued that, because of its regulatory characteristics and its implementation in the present ca …","paragraph_id":"para_344"},{"text":"92","paragraph_id":"para_345"},{"text":"Their action is thus, inter alia, based on the infringement, by the ECB, contrary to the general principles of the protection of legitimate expectations and property, of the expectations which it had created on the part of investors as to the ability of the significant increases in Banca Carige’s ca …","paragraph_id":"para_346"},{"text":"93","paragraph_id":"para_347"},{"text":"In the same context, the appellants claim, in essence, that the General Court erred in law in relying on the case-law cited, incompletely, in paragraph 191 of the judgment under appeal, when that case-law does not concern a case such as the case at hand.","paragraph_id":"para_348"},{"text":"94","paragraph_id":"para_349"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the applicants’ arguments must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_350"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_351"},{"text":"95","paragraph_id":"para_352"},{"text":"It should be recalled that, in accordance with settled case-law, the right to rely on the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations presupposes that precise, unconditional and consistent assurances originating from authorised, reliable sources have been given to the person concerned by the competent authorities of the European Union (judgment of 30 September 2021, Court of Auditors v Pinxten, C‑130/19 , EU:C:2021:782 , paragraph  365 and the case-law cited).","paragraph_id":"para_353"},{"text":"96","paragraph_id":"para_354"},{"text":"It is apparent from that case-law that measures adopted by the authority responsible for supervising the banking sector, or the conduct of that authority in that context, cannot, in themselves, and in the absence of assurances such as those required by the case-law cited in the preceding paragraph of this judgment, be regarded as capable of giving rise to a legitimate expectation on the part of the persons concerned.","paragraph_id":"para_355"},{"text":"97","paragraph_id":"para_356"},{"text":"In particular, the mere fact that the competent authority has imposed on a credit institution subject to its prudential supervision the adoption of certain measures which have actually been adopted cannot, in the absence of precise, unconditional and consistent assurances from that authority in that …","paragraph_id":"para_357"},{"text":"98","paragraph_id":"para_358"},{"text":"In those circumstances, the General Court, in the first place, did not err in law in finding that the appellants’ arguments, based, first, on the ECB’s alleged failure to intervene – in infringement of the applicable Italian legislation – in order to rectify the allegedly misleading statements made …","paragraph_id":"para_359"},{"text":"99","paragraph_id":"para_360"},{"text":"As regards the appellants’ arguments directed against paragraph 191 of the judgment under appeal, they are ineffective. The case-law recalled in that paragraph is not included in the grounds which justified the General Court’s rejection of one or other of the three complaints into which the General Court had subdivided the seventh instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB.","paragraph_id":"para_361"},{"text":"100","paragraph_id":"para_362"},{"text":"In particular, it is apparent from paragraph 196 of the judgment under appeal that the first of those three complaints was rejected by the General Court on the ground – not vitiated by an error of law – that the ECB’s failure to intervene to correct allegedly misleading statements about Banca Carige …","paragraph_id":"para_363"},{"text":"101","paragraph_id":"para_364"},{"text":"As regards the second and third complaints, it is apparent, from paragraphs 199 to 202 and 204 to 206 of the judgment under appeal, respectively, that the General Court rejected them as inadmissible, since the appellants had failed to set out coherently and intelligibly the basic legal and factual particulars relied on.","paragraph_id":"para_365"},{"text":"102","paragraph_id":"para_366"},{"text":"As regards the alleged breach of the appellants’ right to property, it is apparent from their line of argument, summarised in paragraph 91 of the present judgment, that, in their view, that breach was the direct consequence of the sufficiently serious breach of the principle of the protection of leg …","paragraph_id":"para_367"},{"text":"103","paragraph_id":"para_368"},{"text":"It follows from all the foregoing considerations that the first part of the first ground of appeal must be rejected as, in part, unfounded and, in part, ineffective.","paragraph_id":"para_369"},{"text":"(b)\n  \n The second part","paragraph_id":"para_370"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_371"},{"text":"104","paragraph_id":"para_372"},{"text":"The appellants contest paragraphs 193 to 197 of the judgment under appeal, in which the General Court examined and rejected the first complaint raised in the context of the seventh instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB. They claim, in that regard, that the ECB’s assurances which gave …","paragraph_id":"para_373"},{"text":"105","paragraph_id":"para_374"},{"text":"The appellants add that the reference made by the General Court, in paragraph 196 of the judgment under appeal, to the ‘form’ of the ECB’s measures means that the assurances necessary to create a legitimate expectation form part of a contractual relationship, whereas the principle of the protection of such expectations applies specifically in the field of non-contractual liability of the EU institutions and entails a ‘non-contractual penalty’.","paragraph_id":"para_375"},{"text":"106","paragraph_id":"para_376"},{"text":"Furthermore, the General Court distorted their arguments by stating, in paragraph 196 of the judgment under appeal, that they ‘might have hoped that [Banca Carige’s] situation would improve’. They note, in that regard, that it was not the lack of improvement in Banca Carige’s situation which they ha …","paragraph_id":"para_377"},{"text":"107","paragraph_id":"para_378"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the applicants’ arguments must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_379"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_380"},{"text":"108","paragraph_id":"para_381"},{"text":"In the first place, the appellants’ argument that the ECB’s assurances giving rise to a legitimate expectation result from the measures adopted by the ECB with regard to Banca Carige must be rejected for the reason set out in paragraph 96 of the present judgment.","paragraph_id":"para_382"},{"text":"109","paragraph_id":"para_383"},{"text":"In the second place, contrary to what the appellants claim by their argument summarised in paragraph 105 of the present judgment, the reference, in paragraph 196 of the judgment under appeal, to the ‘form’ of the ECB’s failure to intervene in order to correct allegedly misleading statements concerni …","paragraph_id":"para_384"},{"text":"110","paragraph_id":"para_385"},{"text":"In the third place, as regards the reference, in paragraph 196 of the judgment under appeal, to the ‘possibility that the [appellants] might have hoped that [Banca Carige’s] situation would improve’, it is sufficient to note that the General Court envisaged thereby a mere hypothesis which, moreover, bore no consequence for the reasoning set out in that paragraph, as is apparent from a reading of that paragraph as a whole.","paragraph_id":"para_386"},{"text":"111","paragraph_id":"para_387"},{"text":"In the fourth and final place, it is apparent from a reading of paragraphs 193 to 197 of the judgment under appeal as a whole that the General Court correctly understood that the unlawfulness raised by the appellants, alleging breach of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations, con …","paragraph_id":"para_388"},{"text":"112","paragraph_id":"para_389"},{"text":"In the light of the foregoing, the second part of the first ground of appeal must be rejected as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_390"},{"text":"(c)\n  \n The third part","paragraph_id":"para_391"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_392"},{"text":"113","paragraph_id":"para_393"},{"text":"The appellants contest paragraphs 198 to 207 of the judgment under appeal, relating to the examination of the second and third complaints raised in the context of the seventh instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB. In their opinion, the General Court completely ignored their arguments …","paragraph_id":"para_394"},{"text":"114","paragraph_id":"para_395"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the applicants’ arguments must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_396"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_397"},{"text":"115","paragraph_id":"para_398"},{"text":"The appellants’ arguments directed against paragraphs 198 to 207 of the judgment under appeal, relating to the second and third complaints raised in the context of the seventh instance of unlawfulness alleged against the ECB, must be rejected as unfounded. The General Court set out to the requisite …","paragraph_id":"para_399"},{"text":"116","paragraph_id":"para_400"},{"text":"In addition, it is apparent from paragraph 111 of the present judgment that the General Court did not disregard the appellants’ line of argument concerning the ECB’s measures, but examined it in other parts of the judgment under appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_401"},{"text":"117","paragraph_id":"para_402"},{"text":"Last, the appellants’ argument alleging that the incorrect reference, in paragraph 199 of the judgment under appeal, to the increases in the capital of Banca Carige in 2016 and 2018, even though there had been no increase in those years, must be rejected as ineffective.","paragraph_id":"para_403"},{"text":"118","paragraph_id":"para_404"},{"text":"It should be noted, in that regard, that the General Court stated, in paragraph 199 of the judgment under appeal, that the appellants themselves referred, in their written pleadings, to such increases. Even if, in so doing, the General Court had misread those pleadings, such an error cannot call into question the assessment that the second complaint relating to the seventh instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB was inadmissible.","paragraph_id":"para_405"},{"text":"119","paragraph_id":"para_406"},{"text":"That conclusion is based to the requisite legal standard on the finding, in paragraph 200 of the judgment under appeal, that the appellants had failed to provide any information to show that positive assessments, capable legitimately of giving rise to a specific expectation on their part as to the conduct which the ECB would adopt, had been made by the ECB in relation to the capital increases made by Banca Carige before 2019.","paragraph_id":"para_407"},{"text":"120","paragraph_id":"para_408"},{"text":"In the light of the foregoing, the third part of the first ground of appeal must be rejected as in part unfounded and in part ineffective.","paragraph_id":"para_409"},{"text":"(d)\n  \n The fourth part","paragraph_id":"para_410"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_411"},{"text":"121","paragraph_id":"para_412"},{"text":"The appellants dispute the grounds set out in paragraphs 118 to 174 of the judgment under appeal, relating to the fifth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB. They claim that their complaints included ‘critical comments based on the relevant provisions of the Consolidated Law on Banki …","paragraph_id":"para_413"},{"text":"122","paragraph_id":"para_414"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the applicants’ arguments must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_415"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_416"},{"text":"123","paragraph_id":"para_417"},{"text":"The fourth part of the first ground of appeal must be rejected as inadmissible, in accordance with the case-law cited in paragraphs 83 and 84 of the present judgment.","paragraph_id":"para_418"},{"text":"124","paragraph_id":"para_419"},{"text":"The appellants merely state that their complaints included ‘critical comments’ based on the Consolidated Law on Banking, without specifying either the content of those comments or the error of law they claim the General Court to have made.","paragraph_id":"para_420"},{"text":"(e)\n  \n The fifth part","paragraph_id":"para_421"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_422"},{"text":"125","paragraph_id":"para_423"},{"text":"The appellants contest paragraphs 68 to 74 of the judgment under appeal. They submit that the General Court relied on an incorrect interpretation, or even a distortion, of Article 53a(1)(d) of the Consolidated Law on Banking. In their view, because of its extent, that provision confers on the supervisory authority ‘any appropriate powers and duties’.","paragraph_id":"para_424"},{"text":"126","paragraph_id":"para_425"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the applicants’ arguments must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_426"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_427"},{"text":"127","paragraph_id":"para_428"},{"text":"It should be noted that paragraphs 68 to 74 of the judgment under appeal are included in the part of that judgment devoted to the examination of the first instance of unlawful conduct alleging that the ECB had failed to intervene in order to correct allegedly misleading statements concerning Banca C …","paragraph_id":"para_429"},{"text":"128","paragraph_id":"para_430"},{"text":"Contrary to what the appellants claim, in so doing, the General Court correctly read that provision.","paragraph_id":"para_431"},{"text":"129","paragraph_id":"para_432"},{"text":"Therefore, the fifth part of the first ground of appeal must be rejected as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_433"},{"text":"130","paragraph_id":"para_434"},{"text":"In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the first ground of appeal must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_435"},{"text":"2.\n  \n The second ground of appeal","paragraph_id":"para_436"},{"text":"131","paragraph_id":"para_437"},{"text":"The second ground of appeal concerns the grounds of the judgment under appeal relating to the examination of the fifth instance of unlawful conduct, alleging breach, by the ECB, when adopting the early intervention measure, of various rules and principles. That ground of appeal is divided into six parts.","paragraph_id":"para_438"},{"text":"(a)\n  \n The first and third parts","paragraph_id":"para_439"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_440"},{"text":"132","paragraph_id":"para_441"},{"text":"By the first part, the appellants dispute the rejection, for the reasons set out in paragraphs 119 to 129 of the judgment under appeal, of the first complaint put forward in the context of the fifth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, based on a sufficiently serious breach, by the …","paragraph_id":"para_442"},{"text":"133","paragraph_id":"para_443"},{"text":"By the third part, the appellants complain, in essence, that the General Court, in paragraphs 126 to 128 of the judgment under appeal, made an incorrect reading of the early intervention measure.","paragraph_id":"para_444"},{"text":"134","paragraph_id":"para_445"},{"text":"According to the ECB, in that judgment, the General Court analysed in detail the appellants’ line of argument, both with regard to Article 69 octiesdecies of the Consolidated Law on Banking and with regard to the alleged breach of the general principles of EU law, such as the principle of equal trea …","paragraph_id":"para_446"},{"text":"135","paragraph_id":"para_447"},{"text":"Without putting forward any specific arguments in response to the first part of the second ground of appeal, the Commission submits that the appeal should be dismissed in its entirety.","paragraph_id":"para_448"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_449"},{"text":"136","paragraph_id":"para_450"},{"text":"According to the Court’s case-law, the European Union or one of its institutions such as the ECB may incur non-contractual liability under the second paragraph of Article 340 TFEU only if a number of conditions are fulfilled, namely the existence of a sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law int …","paragraph_id":"para_451"},{"text":"137","paragraph_id":"para_452"},{"text":"It follows from that case-law that the first condition for such liability, which concerns the unlawfulness of the conduct alleged against the EU institution, body, office or agency concerned, comprises two parts, namely that it is necessary (i) that a breach of a rule of EU law intended to confer ri …","paragraph_id":"para_453"},{"text":"138","paragraph_id":"para_454"},{"text":"As regards the first part of that condition, according to well-established case-law, the rights of individuals arise not only where they are expressly conferred on them by provisions of EU law, but also by reason of positive or negative obligations which those provisions impose in a clearly defined …","paragraph_id":"para_455"},{"text":"139","paragraph_id":"para_456"},{"text":"The failure to meet such obligations is liable to affect adversely the rights implicitly conferred on individuals under the provisions of EU law in question. The full effectiveness of those rules of EU law and the protection of the rights which they are intended to confer require that individuals have the possibility of obtaining redress (judgment of 5 March 2024, Kočner v Europol, C‑755/21 P , EU:C:2024:202 , paragraph  120 and the case-law cited).","paragraph_id":"para_457"},{"text":"140","paragraph_id":"para_458"},{"text":"In the present case, as is apparent from paragraph 119 of the judgment under appeal, by the first complaint raised in the context of the fifth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, the appellants claimed that the ECB had infringed Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated La …","paragraph_id":"para_459"},{"text":"141","paragraph_id":"para_460"},{"text":"In that regard, it should be borne in mind that, under Article 4(1) of Regulation No 1024/2013, the ECB alone is competent to carry out, for prudential supervisory purposes, the tasks listed in that paragraph in relation to all credit institutions established in the participating Member States, incl …","paragraph_id":"para_461"},{"text":"142","paragraph_id":"para_462"},{"text":"Article 69 octiesdecies of the Consolidated Law on Banking is one of the provisions transposing Article 27 of Directive 2014/59 into Italian law. Pursuant to the second sentence of the second subparagraph of Article 9(1) of Regulation No 1024/2013, for the purpose of carrying out the tasks conferred on it by Article 4(1) of that regulation, the ECB is to have the powers which Article 69 octiesdecies confers on the Bank of Italy.","paragraph_id":"para_463"},{"text":"143","paragraph_id":"para_464"},{"text":"Having made those points, it should be noted, as the Advocate General observed in points 70 to 72 of his Opinion, that the measures provided for in Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking are capable of affecting the rights and legal situation of the credit institution concerned and of its shareholders, in particular where those measures alter the decisions taken by that institution or prevent the distribution of dividends to those shareholders.","paragraph_id":"para_465"},{"text":"144","paragraph_id":"para_466"},{"text":"Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking does not allow the ECB to adopt the measures which that provision sets out so long as the conditions laid down by that provision are not satisfied, since the credit institution concerned and its shareholders have the right to require compliance with that obligation.","paragraph_id":"para_467"},{"text":"145","paragraph_id":"para_468"},{"text":"In accordance with the case-law cited in paragraphs 138 and 139 of the present judgment, it follows that Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking confers rights on individuals, with the result that they may obtain compensation for the damage which they have allegedly suffered in the event of a sufficiently serious breach of that provision.","paragraph_id":"para_469"},{"text":"146","paragraph_id":"para_470"},{"text":"In that regard, it should be recalled that, in the judgment of 15 July 2025, ECB and Commission v Corneli ( C‑777/22 P and C‑789/22 P , EU:C:2025:580 , paragraphs  100 to  105 ), the Court of Justice held that, despite the fact that the appellant in those cases had in the meantime sold the shares wh …","paragraph_id":"para_471"},{"text":"147","paragraph_id":"para_472"},{"text":"That assessment supports the conclusion that provisions, such as Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking, which confer on the ECB, as supervisory authority, the power to adopt, in respect of credit institutions subject to its prudential supervision, measures which affect th …","paragraph_id":"para_473"},{"text":"148","paragraph_id":"para_474"},{"text":"It follows from all the foregoing considerations that the General Court erred in law in holding, in paragraph 129 of the judgment under appeal, that in pursuit of an objective in the public interest, Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking is not intended to confer rights on individuals.","paragraph_id":"para_475"},{"text":"149","paragraph_id":"para_476"},{"text":"Therefore, the first part of the second ground of appeal must be upheld and, without it being necessary to examine the third part, which concerns the same part of the judgment under appeal, that judgment must be set aside in so far as it dismissed the appellants’ action inasmuch as it concerned the alleged infringement, by the ECB, of Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking, when the early intervention measure was adopted.","paragraph_id":"para_477"},{"text":"(b)\n  \n The second part","paragraph_id":"para_478"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_479"},{"text":"150","paragraph_id":"para_480"},{"text":"The appellants claim that the General Court contradicted itself by stating, first, in the second indent of paragraph 135 of the judgment under appeal, that the strategic plan that Banca Carige was required to submit in accordance with the early intervention measure had to ‘include quantitative objec …","paragraph_id":"para_481"},{"text":"151","paragraph_id":"para_482"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the second part must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_483"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_484"},{"text":"152","paragraph_id":"para_485"},{"text":"It must be stated that there is no contradiction between paragraphs 135 and 136 of the judgment under appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_486"},{"text":"153","paragraph_id":"para_487"},{"text":"The fact that, in the early intervention measure, the ECB requested Banca Carige to submit a strategic plan and an operational plan which had, inter alia, to include objectives for the reduction of non-performing loans, as stated in the second indent of paragraph 135 of the judgment under appeal, do …","paragraph_id":"para_488"},{"text":"154","paragraph_id":"para_489"},{"text":"Accordingly, the second part of the second ground of appeal must be rejected as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_490"},{"text":"(c)\n  \n The fourth part","paragraph_id":"para_491"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_492"},{"text":"155","paragraph_id":"para_493"},{"text":"The appellants criticise the ground set out in paragraph 152 of the judgment under appeal to justify the rejection of the fourth complaint relating to the fifth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, based on breach of the principle of equal treatment when adopting the early intervent …","paragraph_id":"para_494"},{"text":"156","paragraph_id":"para_495"},{"text":"In addition, they complain that the General Court did not grant their request to order the preparation of ‘a technical expert’s report designed to establish and compare the situation of other banks in relation to the difference in treatment adopted by the ECB’ and that it disregarded the judgment of …","paragraph_id":"para_496"},{"text":"157","paragraph_id":"para_497"},{"text":"The appellants add that, in the present case, it was necessary, in compliance with Article 47 of the Charter, to apply the ‘rule of proximity of evidence’, according to which, where only one party has knowledge of the facts ‘which amount to the necessary evidence’, while the other party is unable to …","paragraph_id":"para_498"},{"text":"158","paragraph_id":"para_499"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the fourth part must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_500"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_501"},{"text":"159","paragraph_id":"para_502"},{"text":"According to settled case-law, the general principle of equal treatment, as a general principle of EU law, requires that comparable situations must not be treated differently and that different situations must not be treated in the same way unless such treatment is objectively justified. A breach of …","paragraph_id":"para_503"},{"text":"160","paragraph_id":"para_504"},{"text":"In the present case, it is apparent from paragraph 144 of the judgment under appeal that, by the fourth complaint relating to the fifth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, the appellants claimed that the ECB had infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, the principle of equal tr …","paragraph_id":"para_505"},{"text":"161","paragraph_id":"para_506"},{"text":"In that regard, in paragraph 151 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court noted, in essence, that, in order for the fourth complaint to succeed, the appellants would have had to establish that other Italian credit institutions in a situation comparable to that of Banca Carige had been treated differently by the ECB.","paragraph_id":"para_507"},{"text":"162","paragraph_id":"para_508"},{"text":"It added, in paragraph 152 of that judgment, which is criticised by the appellants, that while the appellants had produced a report comparing the number of non-performing loans held by Banca Carige with those held by other Italian credit institutions, they did not however link that particular situat …","paragraph_id":"para_509"},{"text":"163","paragraph_id":"para_510"},{"text":"In the first place, it should be noted that paragraphs 151 to 153 of the judgment under appeal clearly and coherently show the reasons justifying the rejection of the abovementioned complaint, with the result that the appellants’ argument alleging failure to state reasons in that part of the judgment under appeal must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_511"},{"text":"164","paragraph_id":"para_512"},{"text":"In the second place, in so far as the appellants complain that the General Court, in essence, erred in law as regards the allocation of the burden of proof, it must be borne in mind that, according to the case-law of the Court, it is in principle for the person who alleges facts in support of a claim or argument to provide proof of their reality (judgment of 7 November 2024, Ryanair v Commission, C‑588/22 P , EU:C:2024:935 , paragraph  48 and the case-law cited).","paragraph_id":"para_513"},{"text":"165","paragraph_id":"para_514"},{"text":"In the present case, the General Court did not err in law in finding, in essence, that, since the appellants had not adduced any evidence capable of establishing that other Italian credit institutions in a situation comparable to that of Banca Carige had been treated differently in ECB decisions, th …","paragraph_id":"para_515"},{"text":"166","paragraph_id":"para_516"},{"text":"In the third place, as regards the appellants’ argument that the General Court did not grant their request to order the preparation of a technical expert’s report, it must be borne in mind that, in the light of Article 92(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, under which it is to prescr …","paragraph_id":"para_517"},{"text":"167","paragraph_id":"para_518"},{"text":"In that regard, the General Court’s obligation to order, at the request of a party, a measure of inquiry concerning facts which it is for that party to prove, presupposes, first, the existence of an exceptional situation in which that party is encountering difficulty or refusal in accessing the evid …","paragraph_id":"para_519"},{"text":"168","paragraph_id":"para_520"},{"text":"In the present case, the appellants asked the Court to order not the production, by the ECB, of evidence in its possession which it allegedly refused to provide to the appellants, but a technical expertise in order to compare the situation of Banca Carige with that of other credit institutions subject to prudential supervision by the ECB for the purpose of establishing, where appropriate, the existence of different treatment.","paragraph_id":"para_521"},{"text":"169","paragraph_id":"para_522"},{"text":"However, it is apparent, in essence, from paragraph 152 of the judgment under appeal that the appellants had not provided prima facie evidence of such unjustified different treatment, nor had they argued facing difficulties in accessing the evidence necessary to make a link between Banca Carige’s particular situation and that of other credit institutions subject to the ECB’s supervision.","paragraph_id":"para_523"},{"text":"170","paragraph_id":"para_524"},{"text":"Since those findings of the General Court are not called into question by the appellants’ line of argument put forward in the fourth part, it must be held that the General Court did not err in law in rejecting the appellants’ request that a technical expert’s report be ordered.","paragraph_id":"para_525"},{"text":"171","paragraph_id":"para_526"},{"text":"In the light of all the considerations set out in paragraphs 159 to 170 of the present judgment, the fourth part of the second ground of appeal must be rejected as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_527"},{"text":"(d)\n  \n The fifth part","paragraph_id":"para_528"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_529"},{"text":"172","paragraph_id":"para_530"},{"text":"By the fifth part, the appellants criticise the General Court for having rejected, for the reasons set out in paragraphs 154 to 167 of the judgment under appeal, the fifth complaint relating to the fifth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, based on breach of the principle of propor …","paragraph_id":"para_531"},{"text":"173","paragraph_id":"para_532"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the fifth part must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_533"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_534"},{"text":"174","paragraph_id":"para_535"},{"text":"Given that, by the fifth part, the appellants criticise the General Court for having failed to rule on an argument they raised before it, it should be noted that the General Court’s failure to rule on a plea or argument raised before it constitutes a breach of the obligation to state reasons (see, to that effect, judgment of 2 February 2023, Spain and Others v Commission, C‑649/20 P, C‑658/20 P and C‑662/20 P , EU:C:2023:60 , paragraph  118 and the case-law cited).","paragraph_id":"para_536"},{"text":"175","paragraph_id":"para_537"},{"text":"However, it is apparent from the case-law of the Court that the obligation on the General Court to state reasons under the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU and Article 36 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union requires it to disclose in a clear and unequivocal manner the re …","paragraph_id":"para_538"},{"text":"176","paragraph_id":"para_539"},{"text":"In the present case, the appellant’s argument that, instead of requiring Banca Carige to transfer non-performing loans, the ECB should, in compliance with the principle of proportionality, have required Banca Carige to constitute provisions, was based on the premiss that the ECB had imposed such a transfer on Banca Carige.","paragraph_id":"para_540"},{"text":"177","paragraph_id":"para_541"},{"text":"As has already been noted in paragraph 153 of the present judgment, in paragraph 136 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court found that, in the early intervention measure, the ECB had not required Banca Carige to give up non-performing loans. That finding enabled the appellants to understand the reasons why their argument that, in order to comply with the principle of proportionality, the ECB should have required that provisions be constituted had been rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_542"},{"text":"178","paragraph_id":"para_543"},{"text":"Accordingly, the General Court cannot be criticised for having infringed the obligation to state reasons and the fifth part must be rejected as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_544"},{"text":"(e)\n  \n The sixth part","paragraph_id":"para_545"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_546"},{"text":"179","paragraph_id":"para_547"},{"text":"By the sixth part, the appellants criticise the rejection, for the reasons set out in paragraphs 168 to 174 of the judgment under appeal, of the plea of illegality in respect of the early intervention measure which they had raised before the General Court. They claim that they had put forward the un …","paragraph_id":"para_548"},{"text":"180","paragraph_id":"para_549"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the sixth part must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_550"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_551"},{"text":"181","paragraph_id":"para_552"},{"text":"In so far as the appellants claim, in essence, that the General Court infringed the obligation to state reasons, it should be noted that, admittedly, as is apparent from paragraph 174 of the present judgment, the General Court’s failure to rule on a plea or argument put forward before it amounts to an infringement of that obligation.","paragraph_id":"para_553"},{"text":"182","paragraph_id":"para_554"},{"text":"However, the obligation to state reasons is an essential procedural requirement that must be distinguished from the question whether the reasoning is well founded, which goes to the substantive legality of the measure at issue (judgment of 10 September 2024, Commission v Ireland and Others, C‑465/20 P , EU:C:2024:724 , paragraph  389 and the case-law cited).","paragraph_id":"para_555"},{"text":"183","paragraph_id":"para_556"},{"text":"In the present case, in paragraphs 169 to 173 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court set out the reasons why it considered, in paragraph 174 of that judgment, that the plea of illegality raised by the appellants in respect of the early intervention measure had to be rejected. Therefore, irrespective of whether those grounds are well founded, it cannot be criticised for having vitiated the judgment under appeal by a failure to state reasons.","paragraph_id":"para_557"},{"text":"184","paragraph_id":"para_558"},{"text":"In so far as the appellants’ line of argument must be understood as seeking to criticise the General Court for erring in law by rejecting that plea of illegality, such a line of argument cannot succeed.","paragraph_id":"para_559"},{"text":"185","paragraph_id":"para_560"},{"text":"As the General Court held, in essence, in paragraphs 169 to 173 of the judgment under appeal, Article 277 TFEU, which, according to its wording, refers to acts of general application, does not apply to the early intervention measure, which is not such an act. Accordingly, those paragraphs of the judgment under appeal are not vitiated by an error of law.","paragraph_id":"para_561"},{"text":"186","paragraph_id":"para_562"},{"text":"It is true that neither the fact that the early intervention measure cannot be the subject of a plea of illegality under Article 277 TFEU, nor the fact that it was not the subject of an action for annulment under Article 263 TFEU prevented the applicants from pursuing, by an action for damages, comp …","paragraph_id":"para_563"},{"text":"187","paragraph_id":"para_564"},{"text":"The General Court examined the appellants’ line of argument based on the alleged unlawfulness of the early intervention measure as the first to fifth complaints relating to the fifth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB. It should also be noted that, contrary to what the appellants c …","paragraph_id":"para_565"},{"text":"188","paragraph_id":"para_566"},{"text":"In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the sixth part of the second ground of appeal must be rejected as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_567"},{"text":"3.\n  \n The third plea in law","paragraph_id":"para_568"},{"text":"189","paragraph_id":"para_569"},{"text":"The third ground of appeal relates to paragraphs 175 to 186 of the judgment under appeal, relating to the examination of the sixth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB; it is divided into three parts.","paragraph_id":"para_570"},{"text":"(a)\n  \n The first part","paragraph_id":"para_571"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the appellants","paragraph_id":"para_572"},{"text":"190","paragraph_id":"para_573"},{"text":"The appellants complain, in essence, that the General Court failed to examine their argument that the adoption of the own funds decision had adversely affected their legitimate expectation that the increase in capital of Banca Carige carried out in 2017 would ensure its asset and financial soundness …","paragraph_id":"para_574"},{"text":"191","paragraph_id":"para_575"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the first part must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_576"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_577"},{"text":"192","paragraph_id":"para_578"},{"text":"As is apparent from the sixth indent of paragraph 28 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court classified as ‘sixth instance of unlawful conduct’ the appellants’ line of argument that the ECB had committed a sufficiently serious breach of the principle of proportionality by imposing on Banca C …","paragraph_id":"para_579"},{"text":"193","paragraph_id":"para_580"},{"text":"The appellants’ argument in the present part does not relate to observance of the principle of proportionality, but of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations, the infringement of which was classified by the General Court as ‘seventh instance of unlawful conduct’ alleged against the ECB and was examined in paragraphs 187 to 207 of the judgment under appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_581"},{"text":"194","paragraph_id":"para_582"},{"text":"More specifically, the General Court classified the appellants’ claims regarding the ECB’s assessments concerning the capital increases made by Banca Carige before 2019 as a ‘second complaint’ relating to the seventh instance of unlawful conduct. That complaint was examined in paragraphs 199 to 202 of the judgment under appeal and was rejected as inadmissible, as has already been pointed out in paragraph 101 of the present judgment.","paragraph_id":"para_583"},{"text":"195","paragraph_id":"para_584"},{"text":"In those circumstances, the General Court cannot be criticised for having failed to examine the appellants’ argument alleging breach, by the ECB, of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations arising from the approval and proper implementation of Banca Carige’s capital increase carried out at the end of 2017.","paragraph_id":"para_585"},{"text":"196","paragraph_id":"para_586"},{"text":"Furthermore, as is apparent from paragraphs 95 and 96 of the present judgment, the alleged approval by the ECB of Banca Carige’s capital increase, even if it were established, does not amount to the provision of precise, unconditional and consistent assurances, originating from authorised and reliable sources, capable of giving rise to a legitimate expectation which must be protected.","paragraph_id":"para_587"},{"text":"197","paragraph_id":"para_588"},{"text":"Accordingly, the General Court did not err in law in finding, in paragraph 200 of the judgment under appeal, that the appellants had failed to provide any information to show that positive assessments had been made by the ECB concerning the capital increases made by Banca Carige before 2019 and in rejecting, on that ground, the second complaint relating to the seventh instance of unlawful conduct as inadmissible.","paragraph_id":"para_589"},{"text":"198","paragraph_id":"para_590"},{"text":"Consequently, the first part must be rejected as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_591"},{"text":"(b)\n  \n The second part","paragraph_id":"para_592"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_593"},{"text":"199","paragraph_id":"para_594"},{"text":"The appellants criticise the General Court for having confined itself to examining only one of the grounds of unlawfulness of the own funds decision – namely the ground based on the unreasonableness of the period of time for implementing the recovery plan required by that decision – failing to exami …","paragraph_id":"para_595"},{"text":"200","paragraph_id":"para_596"},{"text":"The ECB observes that all the arguments put forward by the appellants with regard to the own funds decision sought, in essence, to demonstrate a breach of the principle of proportionality. The General Court examined those arguments in the context of the analysis of the sixth instance of unlawful con …","paragraph_id":"para_597"},{"text":"201","paragraph_id":"para_598"},{"text":"Without putting forward any specific line of argument in response to the second part, the Commission submits that the appeal should be dismissed in its entirety.","paragraph_id":"para_599"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_600"},{"text":"202","paragraph_id":"para_601"},{"text":"It should be noted that, in paragraph 184 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court examined and rejected the appellants’ argument, set out in particular in paragraph 136 of their application, that the period laid down in the own funds decision for the approval of Banca Carige’s own funds recovery plan by Banca Carige’s board of directors was allegedly unreasonable.","paragraph_id":"para_602"},{"text":"203","paragraph_id":"para_603"},{"text":"Therefore, contrary to what the appellants claim, it must be held that the General Court ruled on that argument.","paragraph_id":"para_604"},{"text":"204","paragraph_id":"para_605"},{"text":"By contrast, it is apparent from a reading of paragraphs 132 to 135 of the application before the General Court that the appellants had in fact put forward other arguments alleging, first, that the ECB was responsible for the situation in which Banca Carige found itself and, second, that several err …","paragraph_id":"para_606"},{"text":"205","paragraph_id":"para_607"},{"text":"Contrary to the ECB’s claims, those arguments cannot be regarded as seeking to demonstrate a breach of the principle of proportionality and, therefore, as being concerned by the grounds set out in paragraphs 175 to 186 of the judgment under appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_608"},{"text":"206","paragraph_id":"para_609"},{"text":"It must therefore be concluded that the General Court failed to rule on those arguments, which, in accordance with the case-law cited in paragraph 174 of the present judgment, constitutes a breach of the obligation to state reasons.","paragraph_id":"para_610"},{"text":"207","paragraph_id":"para_611"},{"text":"Accordingly, it is necessary to uphold, in part, the second part of the third ground of appeal and to set aside the judgment under appeal, in so far as the General Court rejected, without examining them, the appellants’ arguments, set out in paragraphs 132 to 135 of their application, alleging that the ECB was responsible for the situation in which Banca Carige found itself, and that several errors vitiated the grounds of the own funds decision.","paragraph_id":"para_612"},{"text":"(c)\n  \n The third part","paragraph_id":"para_613"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_614"},{"text":"208","paragraph_id":"para_615"},{"text":"By the third part, the appellants claim that the General Court did not provide, in the judgment under appeal, any reasoning to justify the rejection of their complaint alleging infringement of the principle of proportionality. They claim that, instead of examining their arguments, the General Court merely recalled the grounds of the own funds decision, without reviewing their merits.","paragraph_id":"para_616"},{"text":"209","paragraph_id":"para_617"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the third part of the plea must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_618"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_619"},{"text":"210","paragraph_id":"para_620"},{"text":"It should be noted that, after having summarised, in paragraphs 181 to 183 of the judgment under appeal, the grounds of the own funds decision, and then stated, in paragraph 184 of that judgment, that the ECB was entitled to consider, in view of the real risk that the bank would not be able to resto …","paragraph_id":"para_621"},{"text":"211","paragraph_id":"para_622"},{"text":"It is apparent from those grounds of the judgment under appeal that, contrary to what the appellants claim, the General Court did not merely recall the grounds of the own funds decision, but examined the appellants’ arguments and held that, in the light of Banca Carige’s situation, as set out in tha …","paragraph_id":"para_623"},{"text":"212","paragraph_id":"para_624"},{"text":"It should also be noted that the appellants have not put forward any arguments to show that, in so ruling, the General Court erred in law.","paragraph_id":"para_625"},{"text":"213","paragraph_id":"para_626"},{"text":"Accordingly, the third part of the third ground of appeal must be rejected as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_627"},{"text":"4.\n  \n The fourth ground of appeal","paragraph_id":"para_628"},{"text":"(a)\n  \n Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_629"},{"text":"214","paragraph_id":"para_630"},{"text":"The appellants dispute the grounds set out by the General Court in paragraphs 78 to 86 of the judgment under appeal to justify the rejection of the arguments relating to the second instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, alleging that the ECB had infringed EU rules so far as concerns i …","paragraph_id":"para_631"},{"text":"215","paragraph_id":"para_632"},{"text":"The appellants add that the alleged conduct of the ECB was contrary to Articles 3 and 17 of the Charter. In addition, the grounds set out in paragraphs 82 to 85 of the judgment under appeal concern the early intervention measure, and not the ECB’s interference with Banca Carige’s governance, which is the subject of the appellants’ arguments referred to by the General Court as the ‘second instance of unlawful conduct’.","paragraph_id":"para_633"},{"text":"216","paragraph_id":"para_634"},{"text":"Last, in their reply, the appellants observe that, on 18 December 2024, Mr P.F., the former managing director of Banca Carige, was convicted in proceedings before the Tribunale penale di Milano (Criminal Court, Milan, Italy).","paragraph_id":"para_635"},{"text":"217","paragraph_id":"para_636"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the fourth ground must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_637"},{"text":"(b)\n  \n Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_638"},{"text":"218","paragraph_id":"para_639"},{"text":"In paragraph 76 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court noted that, in the context of what it referred to as the ‘second instance of unlawful conduct’ alleged against the ECB, the appellants claimed that the ECB had infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, Articles 4 and 16 of Regulation …","paragraph_id":"para_640"},{"text":"219","paragraph_id":"para_641"},{"text":"In paragraphs 79 to 84 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court carried out an analysis of the provisions of Article 4 and Article 16(1) and (2) of Regulation No 1024/2013, which led it to consider that those provisions were not intended to confer rights on individuals. In paragraph 85 of tha …","paragraph_id":"para_642"},{"text":"220","paragraph_id":"para_643"},{"text":"It must be stated that the grounds of the judgment under appeal summarised in the preceding paragraph of the present judgment were not sufficient to justify the appellants’ arguments relating to the second instance of unlawful conduct being rejected, irrespective of whether, as the appellants claim, they had also relied on other provisions or principles of EU law that the alleged conduct of the ECB, summarised in paragraph 76 of that judgment, had infringed.","paragraph_id":"para_644"},{"text":"221","paragraph_id":"para_645"},{"text":"Although the EU judicature must rule only on the heads of claim put forward by the parties, whose role it is to define the framework of the dispute, it cannot confine itself to the arguments put forward by the parties in support of their claims, or it might be forced, in some circumstances, to base …","paragraph_id":"para_646"},{"text":"222","paragraph_id":"para_647"},{"text":"Thus, in accordance with the principle that the courts are required to resolve the dispute in accordance with the legal rules applicable to that dispute, it is for the General Court, on the basis of the facts put forward in the application, to characterise, without however altering the subject matte …","paragraph_id":"para_648"},{"text":"223","paragraph_id":"para_649"},{"text":"Therefore, in the present case, the General Court could not reject the appellants’ arguments based on the alleged conduct of the ECB, summarised in paragraph 76 of the judgment under appeal, on the sole ground that Articles 4 and 16 of Regulation No 1024/2013, which, according to the General Court, the appellants complained that the ECB had infringed, were not intended to confer rights on individuals.","paragraph_id":"para_650"},{"text":"224","paragraph_id":"para_651"},{"text":"That being pointed out, it should be borne in mind that, according to settled case-law, if the grounds of a judgment of the General Court disclose an infringement of EU law but the operative part of that judgment is shown to be well founded on other legal grounds, such an infringement cannot lead to …","paragraph_id":"para_652"},{"text":"225","paragraph_id":"para_653"},{"text":"That is the case here.","paragraph_id":"para_654"},{"text":"226","paragraph_id":"para_655"},{"text":"First, as regards the alleged consultation between the ECB and the two directors of Banca Carige who had resigned with effect as from 2 January 2019, it should be noted that no rule or principle of EU law prohibits the ECB from having contacts and discussions with the directors of a credit instituti …","paragraph_id":"para_656"},{"text":"227","paragraph_id":"para_657"},{"text":"Second, the ECB may, where appropriate, by duly reasoned decisions, require such an institution to adopt certain measures or, if the circumstances so warrant, place that institution under temporary administration. That said, as is apparent from the preceding paragraph of the present judgment, the EC …","paragraph_id":"para_658"},{"text":"228","paragraph_id":"para_659"},{"text":"Third and last, no rule or principle of EU law requires the ECB to specifically inform the board of directors of a credit institution of the own funds difficulties faced by that institution, where it has already informed the managing director of that institution of those difficulties. In any event, the bodies of such an institution are best placed to be informed, even before the ECB, of any difficulties which their institution may face.","paragraph_id":"para_660"},{"text":"229","paragraph_id":"para_661"},{"text":"It follows that the error of law committed by the General Court, identified in paragraph 223 of the present judgment, has no bearing on the validity of the rejection of the appellants’ arguments summarised in paragraph 76 of the judgment under appeal and, therefore, on the operative part of that judgment, with the result that the fourth ground of appeal is ineffective.","paragraph_id":"para_662"},{"text":"230","paragraph_id":"para_663"},{"text":"As regards the appellants’ reliance, in their reply before the Court of Justice, on the conviction of Mr P.F. by the Tribunale penale di Milano (Criminal Court, Milan), it is sufficient it to note that that circumstance is of no relevance for the present appeal proceedings, the subject matter of whi …","paragraph_id":"para_664"},{"text":"231","paragraph_id":"para_665"},{"text":"In the light of the foregoing considerations, the fourth ground of appeal must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_666"},{"text":"5.\n  \n The fifth ground of appeal","paragraph_id":"para_667"},{"text":"(a)\n  \n Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_668"},{"text":"232","paragraph_id":"para_669"},{"text":"The appellants dispute the grounds set out in paragraphs 97 to 117 of the judgment under appeal relating to the fourth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB, based on the ECB’s appointment, as temporary directors of Banca Carige, of persons who had a conflict of interest. They recall …","paragraph_id":"para_670"},{"text":"233","paragraph_id":"para_671"},{"text":"The appellants add that the ECB cannot exercise its discretion in the matter to the detriment of fundamental rights and without providing an adequate statement of reasons. They claim that the General Court provided, in the judgment under appeal, its own reasoning to remedy the failure to state reaso …","paragraph_id":"para_672"},{"text":"234","paragraph_id":"para_673"},{"text":"The appellants also complain that the General Court failed to examine other grounds of unlawfulness of the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration, both that which it itself acknowledged in the judgment of 12 October 2022, Corneli v ECB ( T‑502/19 , EU:T:2022:627 ), which they …","paragraph_id":"para_674"},{"text":"235","paragraph_id":"para_675"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the fifth ground of appeal must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_676"},{"text":"(b)\n  \n Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_677"},{"text":"236","paragraph_id":"para_678"},{"text":"It is apparent from paragraph 95 of the judgment under appeal that, in the context of what the General Court referred to as the ‘fourth instance of unlawful conduct’ alleged against the ECB, the appellants claimed, in essence, that the ECB had infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, Article 71( …","paragraph_id":"para_679"},{"text":"237","paragraph_id":"para_680"},{"text":"It is apparent from paragraphs 107 to 109 of the judgment under appeal that the General Court rejected those arguments on the ground, in essence, that the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration had been based not on the existence of ‘serious irregularities’ in the management o …","paragraph_id":"para_681"},{"text":"238","paragraph_id":"para_682"},{"text":"In the first place, in so far as the appellants complain that the General Court infringed Article 71(6) of the Consolidated Law on Banking, interpreted in a manner consistent with Article 29(1) of Directive 2014/59, it should be noted, as the General Court did in paragraph 101 of the judgment under appeal, that Article 71(6) provides, inter alia, that the temporary directors of a banking institution must be free from conflicts of interest.","paragraph_id":"para_683"},{"text":"239","paragraph_id":"para_684"},{"text":"It is not apparent from the judgment under appeal, and the appellants do not claim that, they had relied, before the General Court, on the existence of specific circumstances, known to the ECB, from which it is apparent that the two temporary directors of Banca Carige were in a conflict-of-interest situation.","paragraph_id":"para_685"},{"text":"240","paragraph_id":"para_686"},{"text":"Contrary to what appears to be the appellants’ position, a conflict of interest cannot be inferred from the mere fact that those temporary directors had previously been members of Banca Carige’s administrative bodies. Such a conflict can only be found to exist on the basis of specific evidence capab …","paragraph_id":"para_687"},{"text":"241","paragraph_id":"para_688"},{"text":"To accept that any individual who has, in the past, been a member of the administrative bodies of a credit institution placed under temporary administration is, for that reason alone, in a situation of conflict of interest with such an institution would mean that it would be impossible to appoint such persons as temporary directors of that institution, when, thanks to their knowledge of that institution, they may be best placed to perform those functions.","paragraph_id":"para_689"},{"text":"242","paragraph_id":"para_690"},{"text":"It follows that the General Court cannot be found to have infringed Article 71(6) of the Consolidated Law on Banking – interpreted in a manner consistent with Article 29(1) of Directive 2014/59 – in so far as it held, in paragraphs 107 to 109 of the judgment under appeal, in essence, that the mere f …","paragraph_id":"para_691"},{"text":"243","paragraph_id":"para_692"},{"text":"In the second place, the appellants’ argument that the General Court provided its own reasoning to remedy a failure to state reasons for the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration cannot succeed either.","paragraph_id":"para_693"},{"text":"244","paragraph_id":"para_694"},{"text":"As has been pointed out in paragraph 240 of the present judgment, the mere fact that Banca Carige’s temporary directors had, in the past, been members of its board of directors was not sufficient to establish the existence, in their regard, of a conflict of interest. In those circumstances, the ECB …","paragraph_id":"para_695"},{"text":"245","paragraph_id":"para_696"},{"text":"As regards the grounds set out in paragraphs 107 to 109 of the judgment under appeal, they do not seek to supplement the statement of reasons for that decision, but set out the reason why the General Court considered that the appellants’ arguments put forward in the context of the fourth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB could not be upheld.","paragraph_id":"para_697"},{"text":"246","paragraph_id":"para_698"},{"text":"In the third place, concerning the appellants’ argument directed against paragraph 115 of the judgment under appeal, it should be noted that that paragraph forms part of a passage of the judgment under appeal which begins with paragraph 110. Given that, as is apparent from paragraphs 238 to 245 of t …","paragraph_id":"para_699"},{"text":"247","paragraph_id":"para_700"},{"text":"In the fourth place, the appellants’ argument that, in essence, the General Court should have found that the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration was unlawful, first, on the ground relied on by the General Court in order to annul that decision by the judgment of 12 October 2 …","paragraph_id":"para_701"},{"text":"248","paragraph_id":"para_702"},{"text":"Irrespective of whether the appellants had indeed relied before the General Court on those grounds of unlawfulness of the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration, which the ECB disputes, those grounds were not, in any event, capable of establishing any unlawfulness vitiating that decision.","paragraph_id":"para_703"},{"text":"249","paragraph_id":"para_704"},{"text":"First, the judgment of 12 October 2022, Corneli v ECB ( T‑502/19 , EU:T:2022:627 ), was set aside by the appeal of 15 July 2025, ECB and Commission v Corneli ( C‑777/22 P and C‑789/22 P , EU:C:2025:580 ), and, in that appeal, the Court of Justice rejected the plea which the General Court had accepted to annul the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_705"},{"text":"250","paragraph_id":"para_706"},{"text":"Second, for the reasons set out in paragraph 226 of the present judgment, the alleged consultation between the future temporary directors of Banca Carige and the ECB also cannot be regarded as constituting an illegality vitiating the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration.","paragraph_id":"para_707"},{"text":"251","paragraph_id":"para_708"},{"text":"For all those reasons, the fifth ground of appeal must be rejected as in part unfounded and in part ineffective.","paragraph_id":"para_709"},{"text":"6.\n  \n The sixth ground of appeal","paragraph_id":"para_710"},{"text":"252","paragraph_id":"para_711"},{"text":"The sixth ground of appeal is divided into two parts, the first of which covers paragraphs 89 to 94 of the judgment under appeal, and the second concerns paragraphs 208 to 215 of that judgment.","paragraph_id":"para_712"},{"text":"(a)\n  \n The first part","paragraph_id":"para_713"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_714"},{"text":"253","paragraph_id":"para_715"},{"text":"The appellants criticise the General Court for having examined their arguments relating to the approval, by the ECB, of the increase in Banca Carige’s capital in breach of the right of pre-emption provided for in its statutes solely from the point of view of Article 56 of the Consolidated Law on Banking, without taking account of the right to property, enshrined in Article 17 of the Charter, or of other applicable provisions of Italian law.","paragraph_id":"para_716"},{"text":"254","paragraph_id":"para_717"},{"text":"Furthermore, the General Court distorted Article 56 of the Consolidated Law on Banking by holding, in paragraph 94 of the judgment under appeal, that that article does not, in itself, confer rights on individuals. According to the appellants, in so far as the amendment of the statutes of a credit institution may also concern the relationship between that institution and its shareholders, that article also seeks to protect those shareholders’ right to property.","paragraph_id":"para_718"},{"text":"255","paragraph_id":"para_719"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the first part must be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_720"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_721"},{"text":"256","paragraph_id":"para_722"},{"text":"As the General Court noted in paragraph 91 of the judgment under appeal, it is apparent from Article 56 of the Consolidated Law on Banking, applicable to the ECB by virtue of the provisions referred to in paragraphs 141 and 142 of the present judgment as regards credit institutions such as Banca Car …","paragraph_id":"para_723"},{"text":"257","paragraph_id":"para_724"},{"text":"It follows that the General Court did not misread Article 56 of the Consolidated Law on Banking in finding, in paragraph 92 of the judgment under appeal, in essence, that the verification provided for in that provision must relate solely to the compatibility of the proposed amendment to the statutes with the requirement of sound and prudent management of the institution concerned.","paragraph_id":"para_725"},{"text":"258","paragraph_id":"para_726"},{"text":"It is not apparent from the judgment under appeal, and the appellants do not claim that, they had put forward, before the General Court, sufficiently developed arguments to demonstrate that the increase in Banca Carige’s capital approved by the ECB was contrary to the sound and prudent management of that credit institution.","paragraph_id":"para_727"},{"text":"259","paragraph_id":"para_728"},{"text":"The circumstance, relied on by the appellants, that an increase in the capital of a credit institution which does not take account of the right of pre-emption, as provided for in Article 72(1) and (4) of Directive 2017/1132, may be contrary to the right to property of the shareholders of that instit …","paragraph_id":"para_729"},{"text":"260","paragraph_id":"para_730"},{"text":"It should be borne in mind, moreover, that the second sentence of Article 72(4) of Directive 2017/1132 provides that the right of pre-emption, within the meaning of that provision, may be restricted or withdrawn by decision of the general meeting of the company concerned, which was the case here.","paragraph_id":"para_731"},{"text":"261","paragraph_id":"para_732"},{"text":"In those circumstances, it is irrelevant that Article 56 of the Consolidated Law on Banking confers rights on individuals, since, in any event, the grounds set out in paragraphs 91 and 92 of the judgment under appeal are already sufficient to justify the General Court’s rejection of the line of argument concerning the fourth instance of unlawful conduct.","paragraph_id":"para_733"},{"text":"262","paragraph_id":"para_734"},{"text":"Accordingly, the appellants’ arguments directed against paragraph 94 of the judgment under appeal, in which the General Court held that Article 56 does not, ‘in itself’, confer rights on individuals, must be rejected as ineffective.","paragraph_id":"para_735"},{"text":"263","paragraph_id":"para_736"},{"text":"It follows that the first part must be rejected as in part unfounded and in part ineffective.","paragraph_id":"para_737"},{"text":"(b)\n  \n The second part","paragraph_id":"para_738"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_739"},{"text":"264","paragraph_id":"para_740"},{"text":"The appellants claim that, in paragraphs 208 to 215 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court distorted their line of argument concerning the eighth instance of unlawful conduct alleged against the ECB and rejected it on the basis of an incomplete reasoning. They state that they had maintained …","paragraph_id":"para_741"},{"text":"265","paragraph_id":"para_742"},{"text":"The appellants dispute, in particular, paragraph 214 of the judgment under appeal, noting that in order for an EU institution to incur non-contractual liability it is necessary to prove that the conduct of that institution was not the exclusive but the determining cause of the damage suffered. They complain that the General Court infringed the rules on the burden of proof and infringed the obligation to state reasons.","paragraph_id":"para_743"},{"text":"266","paragraph_id":"para_744"},{"text":"The appellants add that they relied before the General Court on the fact that the placing of Banca Carige under temporary administration, which in their opinion was unlawful, had been decisive for the approval of the increase in its capital by its shareholders.","paragraph_id":"para_745"},{"text":"267","paragraph_id":"para_746"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the second part should be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_747"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_748"},{"text":"268","paragraph_id":"para_749"},{"text":"It is apparent from paragraphs 214 and 215 of the judgment under appeal that the General Court rejected as inadmissible the appellants’ line of argument which it referred to as the ‘eighth instance of unlawful conduct’ alleged against the ECB, on the ground that, although they had indicated that the …","paragraph_id":"para_750"},{"text":"269","paragraph_id":"para_751"},{"text":"The appellants criticise the General Court for having carried out an incomplete examination of their line of argument and for having distorted it, since it failed to take account of the arguments raised before it, according to which, in essence, first, they had taken the decision to invest in Banca …","paragraph_id":"para_752"},{"text":"270","paragraph_id":"para_753"},{"text":"First, the appellants’ arguments relating, in essence, to the breach of the confidence that the ECB’s conduct had instilled in them fall within their line of argument alleging breach of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations, which the General Court referred to as the ‘seventh in …","paragraph_id":"para_754"},{"text":"271","paragraph_id":"para_755"},{"text":"Second, in so far as the increase in Banca Carige’s capital without any right of pre-emption for its former shareholders was decided, as is apparent from paragraph 24 of the judgment under appeal and paragraph 39 of the present judgment, not by Banca Carige’s temporary directors but by the general m …","paragraph_id":"para_756"},{"text":"272","paragraph_id":"para_757"},{"text":"It is not apparent from the arguments put forward by the appellants in the second part of the sixth ground of appeal that they had indeed put forward such an explanation before the General Court. The General Court therefore did not err in law in rejecting as inadmissible the appellants’ line of argument which it referred to as the ‘seventh instance of unlawful conduct’ alleged against the ECB.","paragraph_id":"para_758"},{"text":"273","paragraph_id":"para_759"},{"text":"It follows from the foregoing considerations that the second part of the sixth ground of appeal must be rejected, as must the sixth ground of appeal in its entirety.","paragraph_id":"para_760"},{"text":"7.\n  \n The seventh ground of appeal","paragraph_id":"para_761"},{"text":"274","paragraph_id":"para_762"},{"text":"The seventh ground is divided into two parts.","paragraph_id":"para_763"},{"text":"(a)\n  \n The first part","paragraph_id":"para_764"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_765"},{"text":"275","paragraph_id":"para_766"},{"text":"The appellants complain that the General Court infringed the obligation to state reasons, since it failed to examine their line of argument alleging breach, by the ECB, of its prudential supervision obligations, with regard to alleged anomalies which occurred during Banca Carige’s capital increase performed at the end of 2017.","paragraph_id":"para_767"},{"text":"276","paragraph_id":"para_768"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the first part should be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_769"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_770"},{"text":"277","paragraph_id":"para_771"},{"text":"It is apparent from reading the appellants’ application in the case file before the General Court sent to the Court of Justice that the appellants had referred, in paragraphs 100 to 107 of that application, to what they considered irregularities which occurred at the time of the increase in the capi …","paragraph_id":"para_772"},{"text":"278","paragraph_id":"para_773"},{"text":"It is true that, in the context of the eight instances of unlawful conduct in which the General Court grouped together the appellants’ various claims regarding the allegedly unlawful conduct of the ECB, on which they had relied in support of their action, the General Court did not specifically mention the ECB’s failure to intervene at the time of Banca Carige’s capital increase performed at the end of 2017.","paragraph_id":"para_774"},{"text":"279","paragraph_id":"para_775"},{"text":"However, even if that omission could be characterised, in accordance with the case-law cited in paragraph 174 of the present judgment, as a breach of the obligation to state reasons by the General Court, it cannot justify setting aside the judgment under appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_776"},{"text":"280","paragraph_id":"para_777"},{"text":"As noted in paragraph 277 of the present judgment, the appellants claimed, before the General Court, that the alleged irregularities had been committed by Banca Carige’s managing director in office at the end of 2017. Admittedly, they criticised the ECB, in essence, for not having intervened, but they did not explain in any way what specific measures the ECB should have taken, and on the basis of which provisions, assuming that it was aware of those irregularities.","paragraph_id":"para_778"},{"text":"281","paragraph_id":"para_779"},{"text":"In those circumstances, the appellants’ arguments relating to the alleged instances of unlawful conduct which occurred at the time of Banca Carige’s capital increase performed at the end of 2017 could only have been rejected as inadmissible, since the appellants had failed to specify the unlawful acts or omission which they alleged against the ECB.","paragraph_id":"para_780"},{"text":"282","paragraph_id":"para_781"},{"text":"In the light of the foregoing considerations, the first part of the seventh ground of appeal must be rejected as ineffective.","paragraph_id":"para_782"},{"text":"(b)\n  \n The second part","paragraph_id":"para_783"},{"text":"(1)   Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_784"},{"text":"283","paragraph_id":"para_785"},{"text":"The appellants state that they had relied, before the General Court, on the existence of an agreement, between the ECB and two members of Banca Carige’s board of directors, concerning their resignation which resulted in the termination of the duties of that board as a whole and justified the adoption of the decision to place Banca Carige under temporary administration. The General Court failed to examine that line of argument in the judgment under appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_786"},{"text":"284","paragraph_id":"para_787"},{"text":"The ECB and the Commission contend that the second part should be rejected.","paragraph_id":"para_788"},{"text":"(2)   Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_789"},{"text":"285","paragraph_id":"para_790"},{"text":"As is apparent from paragraph 76 of the judgment under appeal, referred to in paragraph 218 of the present judgment, the General Court analysed, in the judgment under appeal, the appellants’ argument alleging the existence of consultation between the ECB and two members of Banca Carige’s board of directors.","paragraph_id":"para_791"},{"text":"286","paragraph_id":"para_792"},{"text":"It follows that the second part, by which the appellants complain that the General Court did not examine that line of argument, must be rejected as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_793"},{"text":"287","paragraph_id":"para_794"},{"text":"Accordingly, the seventh ground of appeal must be rejected as in part ineffective and in part unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_795"},{"text":"288","paragraph_id":"para_796"},{"text":"It is apparent from the examination of the grounds of appeal put forward by the appellants that the judgment under appeal must be set aside in so far as the General Court dismissed the appellants’ action inasmuch as it concerned, first, the infringement by the ECB of Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) o …","paragraph_id":"para_797"},{"text":"289","paragraph_id":"para_798"},{"text":"The remainder of the appeal must be dismissed.","paragraph_id":"para_799"},{"text":"VII.   The action before the General Court","paragraph_id":"para_800"},{"text":"290","paragraph_id":"para_801"},{"text":"In accordance with the first paragraph of Article 61 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, if the decision of the General Court is set aside, the Court of Justice may itself give final judgment in the matter, where the state of the proceedings so permits.","paragraph_id":"para_802"},{"text":"291","paragraph_id":"para_803"},{"text":"Such is the case here.","paragraph_id":"para_804"},{"text":"A.   Infringement of Article 69octiesdecies(1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking when adopting the early intervention measure","paragraph_id":"para_805"},{"text":"1.\n  \n Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_806"},{"text":"292","paragraph_id":"para_807"},{"text":"The appellants claim that the ECB infringed, in a sufficiently serious manner, Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking by adopting the early intervention measure when confronted with a situation in which there was a mere risk of infringement of the applicable regulatory framework, whereas, in their view, for that provision to apply, evidence of a foreseeable infringement of that framework was required.","paragraph_id":"para_808"},{"text":"293","paragraph_id":"para_809"},{"text":"The ECB, supported by the Commission, disputes the applicants’ arguments.","paragraph_id":"para_810"},{"text":"2.\n  \n Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_811"},{"text":"294","paragraph_id":"para_812"},{"text":"It should be borne in mind that, as is apparent from paragraphs 141 and 142 of the present judgment, the ECB is entitled to exercise, with regard to credit institutions subject to its supervision, inter alia, the powers conferred on the Bank of Italy by Articles 69 octiesdecies and 69 noviesdecies of the Consolidated Law on Banking, which transpose Article 27 of Directive 2014/59 into Italian law.","paragraph_id":"para_813"},{"text":"295","paragraph_id":"para_814"},{"text":"Thus, Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking confers on the supervisory authority the power necessary to adopt the early intervention measures referred to therein where, as a result of a rapid deterioration in the situation of the bank concerned or of its group, it finds there to be or foresees, inter alia, an infringement of Regulation No 575/2013 and of Title II of Directive 2014/65.","paragraph_id":"para_815"},{"text":"296","paragraph_id":"para_816"},{"text":"Moreover, under Article 69 noviesdecies of the Consolidated Law on Banking, that authority may request, where the conditions laid down in Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of that law are satisfied, that a credit institution or the parent company of a banking group implement, even in part, the restructuring plan adopted, prepare a plan to negotiate debt restructuring with all or some of the creditors be prepared or, where appropriate, modify their corporate form.","paragraph_id":"para_817"},{"text":"297","paragraph_id":"para_818"},{"text":"In the present case, in point 1.1.1 of the early intervention measure, included in Section 1.1, headed ‘Capital adequacy’, of Part 1, itself entitled ‘Facts on which the decision is based’, of that measure, the ECB stated that, while, in June 2016, Banca Carige’s Common Equity Tier 1 ratio (CET 1) a …","paragraph_id":"para_819"},{"text":"298","paragraph_id":"para_820"},{"text":"In points 1.1.2 and 1.1.3 of the early intervention measure, the ECB noted that Banca Carige’s capital ratios were likely to decrease even beyond the values set out in point 1.1.1 of that measure, with even more significant asset losses in view of Banca Carige’s constant and insufficient performance …","paragraph_id":"para_821"},{"text":"299","paragraph_id":"para_822"},{"text":"In point 2.1 of that measure, the ECB noted that, on the basis of the facts described in Part 1 of that measure, it had established that the conditions for the application of Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) and Article 69 noviesdecies of the Consolidated Law on Banking were satisfied and that it could exercise the powers provided for in those provisions.","paragraph_id":"para_823"},{"text":"300","paragraph_id":"para_824"},{"text":"In point 2.2 of that measure, the ECB added that, in particular, the facts described in Section 1.1 thereof ‘indicate a likely breach of asset requirements in the near future’.","paragraph_id":"para_825"},{"text":"301","paragraph_id":"para_826"},{"text":"It follows that the ECB adopted the early intervention measure after having satisfied itself that the conditions for the application of Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) and Article 69 noviesdecies of the Consolidated Law on Banking were met in the case of Banca Carige, in particular after having consi …","paragraph_id":"para_827"},{"text":"302","paragraph_id":"para_828"},{"text":"Accordingly, the applicants’ argument that the ECB infringed Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking in a sufficiently serious manner when adopting the early intervention measure must be rejected as unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_829"},{"text":"B.   The fact that the ECB was responsible for the situation in which Banca Carige found itself, and the errors, other than that examined in paragraph 184 of the judgment under appeal, which vitiate the grounds of the own funds decision","paragraph_id":"para_830"},{"text":"1.\n  \n Arguments of the parties","paragraph_id":"para_831"},{"text":"303","paragraph_id":"para_832"},{"text":"The appellants claim, in the first place, that the own funds decision appears to be ‘wholly unreasonable’, since no account was taken of the situation resulting from the outcome of the ECB’s review of Banca Carige’s liabilities. The results of that review considerably increased the ‘asset consolidation’ which Banca Carige was to carry out and made a further increase in its capital necessary.","paragraph_id":"para_833"},{"text":"304","paragraph_id":"para_834"},{"text":"In the second place, the appellants claim that the own funds decision was vitiated by illegality on several grounds. First, the ECB did not open an investigation into a press release issued on 16 November 2017, under the responsibility of Banca Carige’s managing director at the time, which caused a loss of confidence in Banca Carige and led to significant withdrawals of deposits. In any event, Banca Carige’s liquidity ratio was far removed from the risk threshold.","paragraph_id":"para_835"},{"text":"305","paragraph_id":"para_836"},{"text":"Second, Banca Carige’s failure to issue EUR 350 million of Tier 2 own funds instruments, referred to in the own funds decision, is linked to ‘an inexplicable and disconcerting individual initiative’ of Banca Carige’s managing director at the time, while the ECB conducted discussions exclusively with ‘the management’ of Banca Carige, without the involvement of the board of directors.","paragraph_id":"para_837"},{"text":"306","paragraph_id":"para_838"},{"text":"Third, the own funds decision refers to governance problems concerning Banca Carige, ignoring the ECB’s own responsibility for the occurrence of those problems. In addition, it refers to uncertainties as to the outcome of the general meeting which was to be held on 20 September 2018, such an allusion being ‘inappropriate and insignificant’, especially since the decisions taken at that meeting largely refute the ECB’s concerns.","paragraph_id":"para_839"},{"text":"307","paragraph_id":"para_840"},{"text":"The ECB, supported by the Commission, disputes the appellants’ arguments.","paragraph_id":"para_841"},{"text":"2.\n  \n Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_842"},{"text":"308","paragraph_id":"para_843"},{"text":"The appellants’ arguments summarised in paragraphs 303 to 306 of the present judgment are not capable of demonstrating that the own funds decision was vitiated by illegality.","paragraph_id":"para_844"},{"text":"309","paragraph_id":"para_845"},{"text":"In the first place, even if, as the appellants claim, the ECB failed to take into consideration, when adopting the own funds decision, the results of the review which it had carried out of Banca Carige’s liabilities, that omission cannot demonstrate that the adoption of that decision was vitiated by …","paragraph_id":"para_846"},{"text":"310","paragraph_id":"para_847"},{"text":"Therefore, the ECB cannot be criticised for having committed an unlawful act in so far as it adopted the own funds decision, it being specified that that decision did not mention a specific amount of own funds that Banca Carige had to reach, but merely required Banca Carige’s board of directors to s …","paragraph_id":"para_848"},{"text":"311","paragraph_id":"para_849"},{"text":"In the second place, the appellants’ arguments summarised in paragraphs 304 to 306 of the present judgment seek, in essence, to claim that the ECB is itself partly responsible for the difficulties which Banca Carige faced in terms of capital on the date of the adoption of the own funds decision.","paragraph_id":"para_850"},{"text":"312","paragraph_id":"para_851"},{"text":"Irrespective of whether such claims are well founded, it is sufficient to note that they cannot, in any event, demonstrate that the adoption of the own funds decision was vitiated by illegality. Banca Carige was indeed able to claim compensation for damage which it allegedly suffered as a result of …","paragraph_id":"para_852"},{"text":"313","paragraph_id":"para_853"},{"text":"As regards the argument that, when the own funds decision was adopted, Banca Carige’s liquidity ratio was not below the risk threshold, it should be noted that the ECB did not rely on a shortfall in Banca Carige’s liquidity ratio in order to justify the adoption of that decision, with the result that that argument is ineffective.","paragraph_id":"para_854"},{"text":"314","paragraph_id":"para_855"},{"text":"It should be noted that, in that decision, the ECB referred in point 2.1.1, under the heading ‘Liquidity and financing situation’, to the fact that Banca Carige had had to face two major liquidity crises, in November 2015 and November 2017, and to the fact that, shortly before the adoption of that d …","paragraph_id":"para_856"},{"text":"315","paragraph_id":"para_857"},{"text":"It follows from all of the foregoing considerations that the appellants’ line of argument alleging that the ECB is responsible for the situation in which Banca Carige found itself, and that errors, other than that examined in paragraph 184 of the judgment under appeal, vitiate the grounds of the own funds decision, must be rejected as being, in part, ineffective and, in part, unfounded.","paragraph_id":"para_858"},{"text":"316","paragraph_id":"para_859"},{"text":"It follows, for the reasons set out in paragraphs 294 to 302 and 308 to 315 of the present judgment, that one of the conditions laid down by the case-law cited in paragraph 136 of the present judgment for the non-contractual liability of the European Union or one of its institutions to be incurred – …","paragraph_id":"para_860"},{"text":"317","paragraph_id":"para_861"},{"text":"Since the three conditions giving rise to liability laid down in the second paragraph of Article 340 TFEU must be satisfied cumulatively, the fact that one of them has not been satisfied is a sufficient basis on which to dismiss an action for damages (judgment of 18 March 2010, Trubowest Handel and Makarov v Council and Commission, C‑419/08 P , EU:C:2010:147 , paragraph  41 and the case-law cited).","paragraph_id":"para_862"},{"text":"318","paragraph_id":"para_863"},{"text":"Accordingly, the action must be dismissed as unfounded in so far as it concerns, first, the ECB’s infringement of Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of the Consolidated Law on Banking when adopting the early intervention measure and, second, the fact that the ECB is allegedly responsible for the situati …","paragraph_id":"para_864"},{"text":"VIII.   Costs","paragraph_id":"para_865"},{"text":"319","paragraph_id":"para_866"},{"text":"Under Article 184(2) of the Rules of Procedure, where the appeal is unfounded or where the appeal is well founded and the Court itself gives final judgment in the case, the Court is to make a decision as to the costs.","paragraph_id":"para_867"},{"text":"320","paragraph_id":"para_868"},{"text":"Under Article 138(1) of those rules, which apply to the procedure on appeal by virtue of Article 184(1) thereof, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party’s pleadings.","paragraph_id":"para_869"},{"text":"321","paragraph_id":"para_870"},{"text":"Since the appellants have been unsuccessful and the ECB and the Commission have applied for costs, the appellants must be ordered to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the ECB and the Commission.","paragraph_id":"para_871"},{"text":"On those grounds, the Court (Fifth Chamber) hereby:","paragraph_id":"para_872"},{"text":"1.","paragraph_id":"para_873"},{"text":"Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 5 June 2024, Malacalza Investimenti and Malacalza v ECB ( T‑134/21 , EU:T:2024:362 ), in so far as the General Court dismissed Malacalza Investimenti Srl and Mr Vittorio Malacalza’s action inasmuch as it concerned (i) the infringe …","paragraph_id":"para_874"},{"text":"2.","paragraph_id":"para_875"},{"text":"Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;","paragraph_id":"para_876"},{"text":"3.","paragraph_id":"para_877"},{"text":"Dismisses the action inasmuch as it concerns (i) the infringement by the European Central Bank (ECB), when adopting Decision ECB/SSM/2016-F1T87K3OQ2OV1UORLH26/26 of 9 December 2016 relating to an early intervention measure, of Article 69 octiesdecies (1)(a) of decreto legislativo n. 385 – Testo unic …","paragraph_id":"para_878"},{"text":"4.","paragraph_id":"para_879"},{"text":"Orders Malacalza Investimenti Srl and Mr Vittorio Malacalza to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Central Bank (ECB) and the European Commission.","paragraph_id":"para_880"},{"text":"[Signatures]","paragraph_id":"para_881"},{"text":"(\n *1\n ) Language of the case: Italian.","paragraph_id":"para_882"}],"word_count":27674,"cites":["C-557/24","T-134/21","T-612/20","C-680/22","C-364/23","C-130/19","C-755/21","C-777/22","C-789/22","C-5/94","C-597/18","C-598/18","C-603/18","C-604/18","C-588/22","C-276/11","C-440/18","C-136/24","C-649/20","C-658/20","C-662/20","C-465/20","C-514/07","C-528/07","C-532/07","C-301/19","C-59/23","T-502/19","C-419/08"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"5733896e24b89a42b4c4e6b70328336d52d35b429f052f37f6e441db39d2bf3e","source_url":"https://publications.europa.eu/resource/celex/62024CJ0557.ENG.xhtml.ECR_62024CJ0557_EN_01.html","fetched_at":"2026-10-01T22:10:10.26+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/eu/c-557-24-p","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu:c-557-24-p","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu:c-557-24-p","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/agent?id=eu:c-557-24-p","verification_scope":{"stored_hash_is_source_verification":false,"official_source_comparison":"not_performed","legal_review":"not_assessed"},"decision_object":{"schema_version":"1","object_id":"decision:eu:c-557-24-p","judgment_class":"E","operative_part":"not_in_register","cites_count":29,"word_count":27674,"decision_url":null},"agent_links":{"agent_root":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/agent.json","agent_overview":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/rapid/agent/overview"}},"hash":"sha256:1177464b22ca94779edab9caf74bb6ec15f31a49cd50d8eb889125834c966bcf","version":"legal-2026-11-02","expires":"2026-11-04T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-11-02+legal-2026-11-02+2026-11-02T16:22:18","content_hash":"sha256:1177464b22ca94779edab9caf74bb6ec15f31a49cd50d8eb889125834c966bcf","revalidate_after":"2026-11-03T03:50:37.152Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-557-24-p","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu:c-557-24-p"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu:c-557-24-p"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/agent?id=eu:c-557-24-p"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=eu"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/eu/praxis/c-557-24-p","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-d70eb57ee9e30bb40aa23236814c634e","response_hash":"sha256:1177464b22ca94779edab9caf74bb6ec15f31a49cd50d8eb889125834c966bcf"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"stable","as_of":"2026-11-03T04:59:53.313Z","valid_for":604800,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu%3Ac-557-24-p&view=full","note":"Oföränderligt objekt med hash. Får cachas länge.","tokens":55541}}