-
.
- Ελληνικά
"The State was faced with an impasse and the measures taken were both in the public interest and to safeguard, to the maximum extent possible, the deposits, including the plaintiff's deposits", states, inter alia, a decision of the Nicosia District Court, dated 20 July 2023, dismissing a claim for the impairment of deposits in 2013, which was brought against the Bank of Cyprus, the Central Bank and the Republic of Cyprus.
The action sought declaratory judgments and damages for the losses allegedly suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the impairment of its deposits, based on the provisions of the 'Resolution of Credit and Other Institutions Law of 2013' and the relevant decree issued for the resolution of the Bank of Cyprus (RBI 103/13), with the plaintiff claiming that its constitutional rights had been violated.
The Court, following an extensive analysis of the arguments put before it, concludes, inter alia, that: "On the basis of the evidence before me, I conclude that it has not been established that the Applicant is in a less favourable position as a result of the reorganisation measure compared to the position it would have been in had [BANK OF CYPRUS] been placed in liquidation", while elsewhere in the judgment it notes: 'Bank of Cyprus was placed under resolution when it became impossible to secure the minimum necessary capital and when it was facing very serious liquidity issues. [...] The above measures were taken in order to avoid a liquidation of the Bank which would have disastrous consequences for the creditors of the Bank of Cyprus and for the State's economy. One of the main reasons why the resolution measure was chosen was to protect insured deposits, to provide depositors with immediate access to their money and to ensure the financial stability of the Cyprus Banking System as a whole. In the circumstances, on the evidence before the Court, it appears that resolution was the best option in the circumstances."
Accordingly, the Court dismissed all of the Plaintiff's claims and awarded costs in favour of the Defendants.
The case was handled on behalf of the Attorney General of the Republic by Ms. Zina Charalambous, Attorney of the Republic I, and Mr. Charalambos Kastanas, Attorney at Law.
Contents of this article including associated images are belongs PIO
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or PIO
Source
