Commentary on Judgment No. 22115 of 2024 on the Liability of Credit Institutions

The recent judgment No. 22115 of August 5, 2024, by the Court of Appeal of Milan offers important clarifications on the liability of credit institutions, particularly regarding the passive standing of the bridge entity following the resolution of Banca delle Marche s.p.a. Ordered by the Bank of Italy, this resolution has raised significant questions about the scope of liabilities transferred to the bridge entity and potential compensation claims by customers.

Regulatory Context and the Resolution of Banca delle Marche

Legislative Decree No. 180 of 2015, particularly Article 43, establishes the procedures for resolving banks in difficulty. The judgment under review emphasizes that liabilities transferred to the bridge entity do not include those arising from violations of regulations concerning financial investment services, unless judicially ascertained. This is a crucial point, as it implies that any pre-existing liabilities of the liquidated bank cannot fall upon the bridge entity.

• Liabilities must be certain, liquid, and enforceable.
• Violations must be judicially ascertained to be considered liabilities.
• The bridge entity lacks passive standing for compensation claims based on unverified debts.

Analysis of the Judgment's Headnote

Resolution of Banca delle Marche pursuant to Legislative Decree No. 180 of 2015 - Compensation claim for liability in financial investment services by the resolved bank - Passive standing of the bridge entity - Exclusion - Reasons. Following the resolution of Banca delle Marche s.p.a., ordered by the Bank of Italy pursuant to Article 43 of Legislative Decree No. 180 of 2015, it must be considered that liabilities arising from violations of regulations concerning financial investment services carried out by the liquidated bank before the effective date of the transfer and not judicially ascertained are not included among the liabilities transferred to the "bridge" entity, as the accounting concept of "liability" requires the debt to be certain, liquid, and enforceable, and not merely potential, with the legislator intending to return a restructured bank to the market at the conclusion of the proceedings; consequently, the bridge entity lacks passive standing in the related compensation proceedings.

This viewpoint of the Court highlights the legislator's intent to provide stability to the banking system by excluding unresolved and potential issues from passive transfer. The decision represents significant protection for bridge entities, allowing them to operate without the burden of unclearly defined liabilities.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 22115 of 2024 represents an important step forward in clarifying responsibilities in the banking sector. It establishes a fundamental principle: liabilities must be certain and ascertained to be transferable. For customers, this means that compensation claims must be based on concrete elements and not on potential violations. In a sector like banking, where trust is essential, this judgment contributes to establishing clear rules and ensuring greater security in the relationship between customers and credit institutions.