Action brought on 1 March 2018 — APG Intercon and Others v Council and Others
(Case T-147/18)
(2018/C 166/46)
Language of the case: English

Parties
Applicants: APG Intercon Ltd (Nicosia, Cyprus) and 147 others (represented by: A. Markides, K. Scordis, A. Gavrielides, C. Velaris, C. Velaris, lawyers, A. Robertson QC (Queen’s Counsel) and G. Rothschild, Barrister)
Defendants: Council of the European Union, European Commission, European Central Bank, Eurogroup (represented by the Council of the European Union) and European Union (represented by the European Commission)

Form of order sought
The applicants claim that the Court should:
—
order the defendants to pay the applicants the sums shown in the Schedule annexed to the application plus interest accruing from 26 March 2013 until the judgment of the Court, as compensation for damage suffered as a result of Eurogroup decisions concerning the resolution of Cyprus Popular Bank Public Co Ltd (‘Laiki Bank’), the bail-in of Bank of Cyprus Public Company Limited (‘Bank of Cyprus’) and the sale of assets and business of the said banks in Greece, and/or as a result of the provision of Emergency Liquidity Assistance to Laiki Bank with the consent of the European Central Bank and the subsequent transfer at the direction of the European Central Bank of the relevant liability to Bank of Cyprus;
or in the alternative:
—
declare that the defendants have incurred non-contractual liability and determine the procedure to be followed in order to establish the actual recoverable loss suffered by the applicants;
and in any event:
—
order that the defendants pay the applicants’ costs of the application.

Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant rely on two pleas in law.
1.
First plea in law, alleging breach of the fundamental principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination:
—
there was unlawful discrimination between creditors of Laiki Bank and/or between creditors of Bank of Cyprus as a result of measures adopted by European Union institutions;
—
the said breaches were sufficiently serious in that the institutions manifestly and gravely disregarded the limits on their discretion; and
—
there is a direct causal link between the breaches and the damage sustained by the applicants.
2.
Second plea in law, alleging breach of the fundamental principle of protection of property rights:
—
the applicant depositors have been deprived of their property rights as a result of measures adopted by European Union institutions;
—
the applicant depositors have not been granted fair compensation for their resultant loss, in breach of the fundamental principle of protection of property rights;
—
the said breaches were sufficiently serious in that the institutions manifestly and gravely disregarded the limits on their discretion; and
—
there is a direct causal link between the breaches and the damage sustained by the applicants.

Full & Egal Universal Law Academy