* Admissibility date reflects the date the case was officially registered. All other dates pertain to the date in which a stage was completed.
Case Description
Complaint
On 18 November 2013, the European Investment Bank Complaints Mechanism (EIB-CM) received a complaint from a manufacturer of software in the United Kingdom (UK) that facilitates mobile commerce for small retailers. The complainant alleged that he had been forced to resign from the company A he founded due to the unreasonable behaviour of one of the members of the Board of the company. The Board member had been appointed as observer by a venture capital firm B, a Product Fund Manager that received funding from North East Finance, the borrower of the EIB.
In November 2009, the EIB lent GBP 62.5 million to North East Finance Limited with the objective of providing risk financing to the Product Funds for the purpose of making investments in small and medium sized enterprises in the North East of England region. Product Funds are managed by companies like a venture capital firm B, which is the direct investor in company A.
The operation combines the EIB loan financing with grants from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and funding from the One North East, the Regional Development Authority and promoter of the operation. The EIB provides 50% of the funding in the form of a senior loan with the other 50% provided by ERDF and One North East serving as an equity cushion.
EIB-CM Action
The EIB-CM carried a review of the allegation, including meetings with the Bank's services, and additional exchange of communications with the complainant and the Bank's borrower. The complaint has been assessed on the basis of the Bank's normal procedures.
Conclusion
The EIB-CM has concluded that the EIB did not fail to ensure that the investee company applied the EIB Group staff code of conduct because the financial contract with the borrower did not provide for it and because the UK national legislation provides sufficient judicial and non-judicial mechanism to redress grievances, which is in line with the general policies of the EIB. As a result, the EIB-CM proceeds to close the case.