UK banking resolution and the EU Single Resolution Mechanism

Banking Law ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 267-295
Author(s):  
Andreas Kokkinis ◽  
Andrea Miglionico
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Smoleńska

AbstractCross-border banking presents a unique set of challenges in the EU from the perspective of arranging administrative oversight structures. Structuring cooperation between different EU and national authorities in a way which is conducive to trust-building and mutual engagement is an essential condition for overcoming disintegrative tendencies in the internal market. To assess how the existing EU arrangements fare in this regard in the context of EU resolution law, this article comparatively analyses the different models of multilevel administrative cooperation in the post-crisis EU framework. These are specifically the centralised model of the European Banking Union (Single Resolution Mechanism) and the relatively looser networked model of the resolution colleges. The multilevel cooperation under both models is nuanced given the distinct roles of the national resolution authorities, EU agencies and the differentiated status of non-euro area Member States in the EBU (Croatia, Bulgaria). The article’s findings allow to identify specific problems of constitutional nature pertaining to the accountability of administrative cooperation, equality of Member States and the implications of Meroni doctrine’s distortive effects.


Author(s):  
Gleeson Simon ◽  
Guynn Randall

This chapter examines how the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive is implemented in international and cross-border situations, both within the EU and between the EU and third countries. The BRRD requires each member state to recognize in their law the effect of resolution actions taken by other member states. This means that as regards foreign resolution action which purports to transfer assets located in their jurisdiction, or rights or liabilities governed by their law, or write-down or convert liabilities governed by their law or owed to creditors in their jurisdictions, their law must make provision for such transfers or conversions to take effect automatically and cannot be prevented, challenged, or set aside under their law. The chapter covers the scope of the Single Resolution Mechanism, cross-border branching, and the relevant changes to the Credit Institutions (Winding-Up) Directive.


Author(s):  
Kokkoris Ioannis ◽  
Olivares-Caminal Rodrigo

This chapter addresses the initiatives of the European Commission to maintain the financial stability of the banking sector. It analyses the regulatory reforms on bank recovery and resolution introduced by the EU aimed at creating a Banking Union, and provides an overview of the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD) by taking into account the crisis management tool innovations. It also offers a critical appraisal of the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM). The initiatives examined here are envisaged in a two-pronged approach: through the uniform rules of the Banking Union and in a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM) and a Single Resolution Fund (SRF) on one hand, and its interrelation with the state aid rules of the Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) on the other.


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 555-587
Author(s):  
Jens-Hinrich Binder

Abstract As part of its ongoing consultation on the European crisis management and deposit insurance framework currently available for the management of bank failures within the EU generally and the Banking Union in particular, the European Commission has called for the respondents’ views as to the need for further harmonisation of resolution arrangements for banks that currently do not qualify for resolution under the auspices of the Single Resolution Mechanism. In this respect, the consultation takes up a broader discussion on the need for harmonised bank insolvency regimes within the EU, which also ties in with an earlier international debate on the functional characteristics of optimal bank insolvency regimes initiated by international standard setters in the early 2000s. Against this backdrop, the paper analyses the case for further reform, and identifies potential impediments (both technical and political) to be expected in this regard. It argues that, while a full harmonisation of resolution powers and the centralisation of decision-making powers can be expected to address relevant concerns regarding the status quo, a comprehensive harmonisation can also be expected to meet with substantial political opposition, which in turn requires a better understanding of the functional requirements to be met by less ambitious reforms.


Author(s):  
Małgorzata Mikita

Banking union is a new concept of the European Union in the field of financial market. The project aim is to strengthen the financial system and increase its resistance to crises that may arise in the future. This article aims to analyse the impact of the banking union on the stability of the financial system in the EU. Three pillars of the banking union are taken into account: single supervisory mechanism, single resolution mechanism and single deposit guarantee scheme. The author argues that the banking union can contribute to the stability of the financial system in the EU, but it cannot guarantee it


2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rinus van Schendelen
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document