On 20 September 2016 the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice delivered two landmark judgments pertaining to the bail-in measures that applied to two Cypriot banks (Bank of Cyprus and Popular (“Laiki”) Bank) in 2013. The judgments deal with three novel constitutional issues relating to judicial protection: First, the legal status of the Eurogroup, the reviewability of its output and the role of the Union institutions involved therein. Second, the EU Treaties’ limitations on the participation of Union institutions in the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) and the Union institutions’ liability when acting in that context. Finally, the permissible restrictions on the right to property under the EU Charter in the light of a bail-in. These rulings aim to reduce the legal uncertainty within the EMU’s governance. They are part of the litigation generated by the euro crisis which can be divided in two categories: First, the litigation pertaining to the normative and institutional developments in the EMU’s governance (see Pringle, Gauweiler); second, cases challenging the macroeconomic conditionality accompanying the financial assistance programmes to member states and respective austerity measures (e.g. ADEDY).
|Journal||Revue Internationale des Services Financiers|
|Publication status||Published - 1 Apr 2017|