THE IMPACT OF THE JUDGEMENT IN CASE C-219/17, BERLUSCONI AND FININVEST, ON COURT JURISDICTION REGARDING LEGALITY OF ACTS BY INSTITUTIONS OF SINGLE RESOLUTION MECHANISM

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

PDF
Published Dec 18, 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.13165/j.icj.2019.12.004

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Märt Maarand

Abstract

A case of the European Court of Justice C-219/17, Berlusconi and Fininvest, laid down important rules for differentiating between the jurisdictions of EU courts and national courts in actions challenging the final decisions of composite procedures in the Single Supervisory Mechanism. As this judgement does not cover all scenarios, nor are there such decisions regarding the Single Resolution Mechanism, a universal test is developed for revealing if EU courts or national courts have jurisdiction over acts of composite procedures in the Banking Union. This test is then implemented on the most important acts within the Single Resolution Mechanism.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Issue
Vol. 5 No. 2 (2019): International Comparative Jurisprudence
Section
ARTICLES

Authors contributing to International Comparative Jurisprudence agree to publish their articles under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public (CC BY-NC-ND) License, allowing third parties to share their work (copy, distribute, transmit) and to adapt it, under the condition that the authors are given credit, and that in the event of reuse or distribution, the terms of this license are made clear.