Compulsory restructuring of Getin Noble Bank. A sudden turn in court. The Supreme Administrative Court overturned an important judgment
2026-03-26 18:22, updated 2026-03-26 18:59
publication
2026-03-26 18:22
update
2026-03-26 18:59
On Thursday, the Supreme Administrative Court overturned the judgment of the administrative court regarding the compulsory restructuring of Getin Noble Bank, finding that the BFG decision was issued in violation of the law. The case is being reconsidered.
The case concerns the compulsory restructuring of Getin Noble Bank carried out by the Bank Guarantee Fund (BFG) in 2022. The decision of the BFG in this respect was challenged, among others. by the bank's supervisory board. At the end of January 2025, the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw found that the BFG decision was issued in violation of the law; The Fund appealed against this judgment, and the case was brought before the Supreme Administrative Court.
The case, although initially supposed to be held behind the open doors, was ultimately kept secret. BFG's representatives requested the withdrawal of the transparency of the proceedings, explaining the possibility of violating banking secrecy. The court agreed to their request.
After several hours of a closed trial, the Supreme Administrative Court decided to accept the BFG's cassation appeal, thereby overturning the judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw and sending the case back for reconsideration. In its oral justification, the court of second instance assessed that: the justification for the Provincial Administrative Court's judgment included “deficits at both the EU and national levels.” According to the court, in the justification for this judgment the Provincial Administrative Court presented arguments that were “abstract and general” and its core was to be an abstract control of the BFG's internal regulations.
The court also stated that the Provincial Administrative Court did not explain the motives and assessment why the decision of the BFG regarding the compulsory restructuring of Getin Noble Bank was to be adopted illegally. Therefore – as the Supreme Administrative Court added – the court is unable to share the opinion of the Provincial Administrative Court or issue a contrary ruling, because the grounds for doing so are missing in the justification of the judgment of the first instance court. The Supreme Administrative Court pointed out that since there are deficits in the justification of the judgment, there are also deficits in the control of the BFG decision itself, which is the reason for repealing the judgment and sending it back for reconsideration.
BFG: after the Supreme Administrative Court's judgment, the case of compulsory restructuring of Getin Noble Bank will be reassessed
“BFG is pleased to accept the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court,” BFG said in a statement after the judgment. He added that the Supreme Administrative Court's ruling confirms “the validity of the Fund's key allegations against the Provincial Administrative Court's judgment in Warsaw, which focused on the defective actions of the first-instance court, especially the way in which the legality of the BFG's activities was controlled.” In the Fund's assessment, the Supreme Administrative Court found very significant shortcomings on the part of the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw, and consequently found that the court of first instance “unjustifiably assumed in its judgment that the decision of the BFG was issued in violation of the law.”
In the opinion of the BFG, the re-examination of the case by the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw will enable its analysis taking into account the indications contained in the justification of the Supreme Administrative Court's judgment. “The BFG is also waiting for the written justification of the judgment, which will include appropriate guidelines for the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw when reconsidering the case,” the Fund emphasized.
He stated that from the beginning of the proceedings he had presented a consistent position regarding the correctness of the decision issued and the manner of interpreting the provisions applicable to the case. He emphasized that the decision is an important stage in further administrative court proceedings. At the same time, pointing out that “the previous judicial and administrative review of the BFG's decision has not been carried out properly. Following the issuance of the Supreme Administrative Court's judgment, the case will be subject to another comprehensive assessment by the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw,” the BFG added.
However, Dr. Grzegorz Keler, who deals with matters of compulsory restructuring, assessed that the Provincial Administrative Court “did not indicate at any point in its considerations included in the justification that a thorough analysis of the case was lacking and the reliability of the valuation (resolution estimate) was questionable.”
“These issues were raised by the complainant, but the court did not agree with her arguments. The Provincial Administrative Court, having previously found a violation of the law in terms of the alleged incorrect separation of functions (compulsory restructuring, guarantee and guardianship) by the BFG, did not proceed at all to the stage of examining the correctness of the findings made and evaluation of evidence by the BFG in the administrative proceedings. It is very unlikely that this will change as a result of re-examination of the case,” says Dr. Keler.
Over 8,000 complaints have been filed against compulsory restructuring of Getin Noble Bank
At the end of September 2022, the Bank Guarantee Fund started the compulsory restructuring of Getin Noble Bank. As the Fund assured, this allowed it to “protect all customer deposits in the amount of PLN 38.1 billion, including PLN 3.3 billion of deposits that could not be paid out under the BFG guarantee in the event of bankruptcy.” A complaint about the restructuring was filed by, among others, bank supervisory board and clients. In total, over PLN 8,000 was contributed. complaints.
The Court of Justice of the EU also commented on the case and stated that the national court should examine not only the complaint of the bank's supervisory board regarding its compulsory restructuring, but also other complaints, e.g. from customers and shareholders. The CJEU also ruled that EU law obliges a member state to ensure the “operational independence” of the BGF and to avoid conflicts of interest when conducting resolution.
However, if there are no national provisions to ensure this independence, it may be – as the CJEU stated at the time – guaranteed by the proper organization of the institution's operation. According to the CJEU, in such a case it is up to the BFG to determine whether EU rules have been complied with and, therefore, whether its decision was taken solely with a view to achieving the resolution objectives.
Following the answers of the CJEU, the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw in January this year found that the decision of the BFG on the compulsory restructuring of Getin Noble Bank was issued in violation of the law. BFG, not agreeing with the court's decision, appealed it to the Supreme Administrative Court.
In June last year, the Supreme Administrative Court accepted a cassation appeal against the judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw regarding the compulsory restructuring of another financial institution – Idea Bank. On August 25, 2021, the Provincial Administrative Court dismissed 606 complaints filed against the decision of the Bank Guarantee Fund of December 30, 2020, finding that the BFG decision regarding the restructuring of Idea Bank was not issued in violation of the law. After Monday's judgment, the Provincial Administrative Court will have to once again deal with this case with respect to entities whose complaints were found to be justified.
The Bank Guarantee Fund guarantees deposits collected in banks and credit unions and is responsible for carrying out compulsory restructuring of financial institutions at risk of bankruptcy. (PAP)
jls/aop/
