The Federal Act on the Recovery and Resolution of Banks (“BaSAG”) obliges the FMA as the resolution authority to announce per edict the legal effect of the decision, whereby resolution measures were ordered.
Legal effect means, that decisions can neither be contested, nor amended by the authority. The legislature clearly states in the annex to the BaSAG, that the publication of information needs to take place for publicity reasons as well as in the best interest of the parties directly affected by the measures.
FMA publishes the legally binding edict in the same place on their website where already three emergency administrative- and administrative decisions in relation to the challenge procedure concerning the resolution of the HETA ASSET RESOLUTION AG are to be found.
No, the edict is not a decision by FMA. It only confirms the legal effect of the underlying decision, but does not change its content.
Since the edict is not a new decision, there are no changes to the quota for bail-in determined in the decision.
The quota announced in the administrative decision in relation to the challenge procedure III amounting to 86,32% of the respective nominal value as per March 1st, 2015 or the open balance including the accrued interest on eligible liabilities from HETA by Feb.28th, 2015 remains the same.
Does the publication of the edict mean that the resolution of the HETA ASSET RESOLUTION AG is coming to an end or does it mean its dissolution?
The publication of the edict does not imply the end of the resolution of the HETA. HETA has not been resolved under company law. For this purpose a statutory decision of the HETA organs and a separate notice of anulment is needed. Until then the situation for FMA being the supervisory- as well as resolution authority in charge remains the same.