IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/refreg/v1y2015i2p226-262..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Standing and Judicial Review in the New EU Financial Markets Architecture

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Witte

Abstract

The three European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) have been entrusted with various tasks relating to the supervision over financial market sectors by competent authorities. These tasks are complemented by legally binding powers vis-à-vis competent authorities. In addition, the ESAs draft standards are to be adopted in the form of directly applicable regulations. This article examines how private undertakings may challenge ESA acts judicially and quasi-judicially. The outcome of the analysis is that Union law may offer ample opportunities for private parties to challenge ESA acts not addressed to them. This may come as a surprise given the traditionally restrictive interpretation of standing in Union law, but can be supported de lege lata even though the question has not yet been ruled upon authoritatively. The article also discusses the question of standing against supervisory decisions of the European Central Bank within the framework of the Single Supervisory Mechanism. The question is placed within the broader context of the EU’s self-imposed standards of rule of law, which require extensive powers of European institutions to be accompanied with sufficient opportunities for judicial review, not only to protect rights of market actors but also to promote the further development and harmonization of substantive EU law.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Witte, 2015. "Standing and Judicial Review in the New EU Financial Markets Architecture," Journal of Financial Regulation, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 226-262.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:refreg:v:1:y:2015:i:2:p:226-262.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jfr/fjv002
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:refreg:v:1:y:2015:i:2:p:226-262.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jfr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.