The Administrative and Judicial Review of Decisions of the ECB in the Supervisory Field

Morra, Concetta Brescia

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2851819

SSRN Journal

2016

DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2851819

|View full text |Cite

The Administrative and Judicial Review of Decisions of the ECB in the Supervisory Field

Concetta Brescia Morra

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2017

2019

Publication Types

Select...

Article2

Relationship

Self Cite1

Independent1

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It becomes therefore essential to ensure that full and effective judicial protection is guaranteed to individuals in respect of such supervisory decisions. Among the various issues related to the judicial protection of the addressees of the ECB banking supervision (Chiti M.P., 2019;Cassese et al, 2018;Brescia Morra, 2016;Arons, 2015;Annunziata, 2019), little attention has so far been paid to the question of the intensity of judicial scrutiny on ECB supervisory decisions. Building upon the analysis of the first judgments of the General Court, the present article aims to contribute to the academic debate on the standards of judicial control of discretionary measures in the field of EU banking supervision.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intensity of Judicial Review of the European Central Banks’s Supervisory Decisions

Magliari

2019

CEPAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A few years after the establishment of the Single Supervisory Mechanism, the General Court of the European Union, in its new supervisory role, annulled for the first time the decisions adopted by the European Central Bank (ECB). These judgments are of particular interest because they allow a preliminary investigation of the intensity of judicial review of the ECB's discretionary choices in the field of banking supervision. This article claims that the first case law of the General Court points to several interesting developments and indicates the resolve to carry out a judicial review which, although adhering strictly to the "limited review" standard, does not shy away from developing judicial techniques to ensure a more incisive scrutiny of the discretion enjoyed by the ECB. Despite the novelty of the issues brought to the attention of the EU judges, it seems possible as a result of this study to envisage, on the one hand, a gradual alignment of the scrutiny of supervisory decisions with those emerged in relation to the Commission's decisions on competition matters. On the other hand, a differentiation from the "light touch" approach adopted in the field of monetary policy can be observed.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intensity of Judicial Review of the European Central Banks’s Supervisory Decisions

Magliari

2019

CEPAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Administrative Board of Review of the European Central Bank: Experience After 2 Years

Morra

Smits

Magliari

2017

Eur Bus Org Law Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the administrative remedy provided by the Administrative Board of Review (ABoR) of the European Central Bank (ECB), as part of the broader issue of the right of defence of natural and legal persons vis-à-vis ECB supervisory decisions within the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM). After presenting an overview of the review panels established in the financial sector in the EU, the article describes the experience with the ABoR by analysing its composition, its mandate and scope of review, the main procedural aspects and the relationship with judicial proceedings before the European Court of Justice. Particular This article is based on the presentation René Smits gave at a workshop on The Single Supervisory Mechanism

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

hi@scite.ai

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

The Administrative and Judicial Review of Decisions of the ECB in the Supervisory Field

Cited by 2 publications

References 1 publication

Intensity of Judicial Review of the European Central Banks’s Supervisory Decisions

Intensity of Judicial Review of the European Central Banks’s Supervisory Decisions

The Administrative Board of Review of the European Central Bank: Experience After 2 Years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About