Common use of INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Clause in Contracts

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. The SSM constitutes an integrated administration for the exercise of prudential banking supervision with unique features, posing problems for effective judicial protection. The ECB is to be regarded as the central supervisory authority, responsible for the ‘effective and consistent function- ing of the SSM’, yet is highly dependent on the assistance of the NCAs. Furthermore, ‘assistance’ in many instances would be an understatement for describing the close involvement and essential responsibilities of the NCAs. The NCAs are, inter alia, responsible for the direct supervision of less significant entities, for preparing draft decisions for the ECB and for imple- ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ECB instructions. The integrated nature of the SSM raises a host of legal issues, most notably in guaranteeing effective judicial protection. This dissertation is dedicated to effective judicial protection within the SSM and more specifically within SSM composite procedures, seeking to answer the main research question: This final chapter summarises the findings of the previous chapters and presents concluding observations, syntheses and recommendations that aim to improve the current legal and doctrinal framework governing judicial protection in SSM composite procedures. The recommendations will be addressed to a variety of actors, including the EU legislature, EU and national courts, the ECB and NCAs. Furthermore, this chapter seeks to place the findings regarding the SSM in the broader context of the increas- ing Europeanisation and integration of EU administration. Important to emphasise here is that various dissertations and other academic contributions have also analysed the topic of judicial protection within the SSM.1 Some of the conclusions and recommendations in this chapter correspond to those addressed in other contributions, which in my view reinforces the necessity of critically evaluating the current system and introducing reforms to address the problems identified. Yet not all conclu- 1 For a more extensive overview, see Ch. 1, para 1.7. sions and recommendations are shared with other contributions, and in some respects, this dissertation will propose more far-reaching reforms than proposed by other legal scholars.