{"title":"Enforcement of sanctions within the SSM by European and national authorities: unravelling jurisdiction and accountability under Union law","authors":"Helene Hayden","doi":"10.1057/s41261-024-00249-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Under the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM), the enforcement of pecuniary obligations vis-à-vis the ECB, such as fees and sanctions, is unclear at two levels: first, the division of sanctioning powers between European authorities (ECB) and the ‘National Competent Authorities’ (NCAs) under primary and secondary law is rather unclear due to the underlying jumble of referrals. Second, the Article pivotal to enforcement, namely Art. 299 TFEU, constitutes only a ‘vague hybrid legal regime’ between European and national law, leaving credit institutions as well as the ECB exposed to considerable legal uncertainties and, as a result, additional costs. This paper examines both levels—which have received almost no attention in the literature so far—and offers concrete solutions to close the existing protection gaps.</p>","PeriodicalId":15105,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Banking Regulation","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Banking Regulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41261-024-00249-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Under the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM), the enforcement of pecuniary obligations vis-à-vis the ECB, such as fees and sanctions, is unclear at two levels: first, the division of sanctioning powers between European authorities (ECB) and the ‘National Competent Authorities’ (NCAs) under primary and secondary law is rather unclear due to the underlying jumble of referrals. Second, the Article pivotal to enforcement, namely Art. 299 TFEU, constitutes only a ‘vague hybrid legal regime’ between European and national law, leaving credit institutions as well as the ECB exposed to considerable legal uncertainties and, as a result, additional costs. This paper examines both levels—which have received almost no attention in the literature so far—and offers concrete solutions to close the existing protection gaps.
期刊介绍：
Under the guidance of its highly respected Editors and an eminent and truly international Editorial Board?Journal of Banking Regulation?has established itself as one of the leading sources of authoritative and detailed information on all aspects of law and regulation affecting banking institutions.Journal of Banking Regulation?publishes in each quarterly issue detailed briefings analyses and updates which are of direct relevance to practitioners working in the field while meeting the highest intellectual standards.Journal of Banking Regulation?publishes the latest thinking and best practice on:Basel I II and IIIModels for banking supervisionInternational accounting standardsDeposit protectionEnforcement decisions in banking regulation and supervisionCross-border competition in banking servicesCorporate governance in banksHarmonisation in banking marketsSupervising credit riskAnti-money laundering legislation and regulationsMonetary integrationRisk capital and capital adequacySystemic risk in banking operationsCross-border regulationCross-border bank insolvencyModels for banking riskEssential reading for:central bankersbanking supervisorsfinancial regulatorsbankerscompliance officersheads of risk managementpolicy makersbank associationslawyers specialising in banking lawaccountantsinternal and external bank auditorsacademics and researchers
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
