link: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2020-12/cp200160en.pdf

Languages available: bg es cs da de et el en fr hr it lv lt hu mt nl pl pt ro sk sl fi sv

Court of Justice of the European Union

PRESS RELEASE No 160/20 Luxembourg,

16 December 2020

Judgment in Joined Cases C-597/18 P Council v K. Chrysostomides & Co. and Others, C-598/18 P Council v Bourdouvali and Others, C-603/18 P K. Chrysostomides & Co. and Others v Council and C-604/18 P Bourdouvali and Others v Council

The Court of Justice upholds the judgments of the General Court in so far as it dismissed the actions for damages brought by a number of individuals and companies on account of acts and conduct adopted by the EU institutions in connection with financial assistance granted to Cyprus that was conditional upon the restructuring of its banking sector. 

On the other hand, the General Court erred in law in holding that the Euro Group constitutes an EU body established by the Treaties whose acts or conduct might give rise to non-contractual liability of the European Union

During the first months of 2012, several banks established in Cyprus, including Cyprus Popular Bank (‘Laïki’) and Trapeza Kyprou Dimosia Etaireia (Bank of Cyprus; ‘BoC’), encountered financial difficulties. On 25 June 2012, Cyprus therefore presented a request for financial assistance to the President of the Euro Group, which stated that such assistance would be provided by either the European Financial Stability Facility or the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) in the context of a macroeconomic adjustment programme that was to be defined in a memorandum of understanding. The negotiation of such a memorandum was conducted by the European Commission together with the European Central Bank (ECB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), on the one hand, and the Cypriot authorities, on the other. On 26 April 2013, a memorandum of understanding was thus signed by the Commission on behalf of the ESM, the Cypriot Minister for Finance and the Governor of the Central Bank of Cyprus, and this enabled the ESM to grant financial assistance to Cyprus.

A number of individuals and companies that held deposits with Laïki or BoC or were shareholders or bondholders of those banks took the view that the Council of the European Union, the Commission, the ECB and the Euro Group had, in the context of that memorandum of understanding, required the Cypriot authorities to adopt, maintain or continue to implement measures that caused a substantial reduction in the value of their deposits, shares or bonds. They therefore brought actions to establish non-contractual liability before the General Court of the European Union, in order to be compensated for the losses which they claim to have suffered because of those measures (...).