Greece / Council of State / 1506/2014 Bondholders of Greek State bonds v the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance and the Bank of Greece

Key facts of the case:

Bondholders of bonds issued or guaranteed by the Greek State claimed that the bonds replacement process that was adopted by a year 2012 act was against the law. We mention that according to that legislation the bonds lost most of their value. The applicants claimed that the process was related with agreements between the Greek and the rest of E.U. States and European bodies on the grounds of compliance of the Greek State in E.U. bodies decisions, thus it is subject to Community Law and not the Greek one. The court decided that the process, although related with multilateral agreement s was based on acts passed by the Greek parliament, in an exercise of sovereign rights of the member State. In that way, according to the court, it is not the E.U. law to be complied. Additionally the "European Financial Stability Facility-EFSF ") which entered the financial facility contracts with Greece, is not an E.U. institution responsible for the implementation of European Union law, but has been founded by members-states of the Eurozone as a private entity. The Charter though, after the Lisbon treaty came into effect, is applicable in the E.U. per se and the member states. By this path of legal though the court denied that there is no reason for a preliminary question to the ECJ.

Paragraphs referring to EU Charter: 

 

The suggested legal version, according to which in the contested acts European Union law has to be applied, because they were issued following, and in implementation and compliance with acts of bodies of E.U., is incorrect and can not support the grounds for annulment referring to infringements of provisions (Articles 17 and 20) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The later, put in force after the ratification of Lisbon Treaty with Law 3671/2008 (A` 129), has the same legal value as the Treaties of EU and falls within the scope of European law, both of the Union per se and the Member States. Based on the above data, there is no legitimate reason to undergo a relevant preliminary question to the Court of Justice of the European Union, as required by the application.

Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language): 

 

η υποστηριζόμενη νομική εκδοχή, σύμφωνα με την οποία με τις προσβαλλόμενες πράξεις εφαρμόσθηκε δίκαιο της Ευρωπαϊκής Ενωσης λόγω της εκδόσεώς τους σε συνέχεια, κατ’ εφαρμογή και σε συμμόρφωση με πράξεις οργάνων της Ενωσης, είναι εσφαλμένη και δεν δύναται να στηρίξει τους προβαλλόμενους λόγους ακυρώσεως που αναφέρονται σε παράβαση διατάξεων (των άρθρων 17 και 20) του Χάρτη των Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων ΕΕ, ο οποίος μετά την έναρξη της ισχύος της κυρωθείσης με τον ν. 3671/2008 (Α` 129) Συνθήκης της Λισαβόνας έχει το ίδιο νομικό κύρος με τις Συνθήκες ΕΕ και ευρίσκει πεδίο εφαρμογής εντός του δικαίου της Ευρωπαϊκής Ενωσης, τόσο από την Ενωση όσο και από τα κράτη - μέλη (ΣτΕ 1285/2012, Ολ.). Υπό τα ανωτέρω δεδομένα, δεν συντρέχει νόμιμος λόγος να υποβληθεί σχετικό προδικαστικό ερώτημα στο Δικαστήριο της Ευρωπαϊκής Ενωσης, όπως ζητείται με το δικόγραφο της κρινομένης αιτήσεως.

Language: 
Greek
Deciding body (original language): 
Συμβούλιο της Επικρατείας
Language: 
Greek