The rationale behind allowing for a provisional valuation, as explained in Recital 52 and Article 36(9) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD), is for the resolution authority to be able to make a rapid valuation for the reasons of urgency. This reflects the concern that complying with all the requirements of Article 36 of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD), including the need to hire an independent valuer, may be time consuming, with the resulting delay having implications for the effectiveness of entire resolution process. If the resolution authority is able to outsource the provisional valuation rapidly, this is not expressly forbidden by the Directive.

The same valuer can prepare the provisional and ex-post definitive valuation. This means that the requirement of independence referred to in Article 36(1) will be complied with in both cases, as it has to be complied with for the purposes of ex-post definitive valuation.

Disclaimer:

This question goes beyond matters of consistent and effective application of the regulatory framework. A Directorate General of the Commission (Directorate General Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union) has prepared the answer, albeit that only the Court of Justice of the European Union can provide definitive interpretations of EU legislation. This is an unofficial opinion of that Directorate General, which the European Banking Authority publishes on its behalf. The answers are not binding on the European Commission as an institution. You should be aware that the European Commission could adopt a position different from the one expressed in such Q&As, for instance in infringement proceedings or after a detailed examination of a specific case or on the basis of any new legal or factual elements that may have been brought to its attention.