ECJ has given its judgment in the case of Safe Interenvíos S.A. v. Liberbank S.A. and others (see FReD 18 September 2015 for a summary of its opinion). In this matter, three banks had closed accounts a payment institution held with them, on the basis of money laundering concerns. Questions referred to the ECJ concerned whether the Third Money Laundering Directive (MLD3) precludes a Member State from allowing a credit institution to apply standard or enhanced customer due diligence measures to a payment institution that is itself covered by MLD3. Then, if it can, what would be the conditions under which Member States may provide for that to happen. The judgment agrees with the Advocate General’s opinion that the fact that a customer is a payment institution does not mean that a Member State must not require enhanced due diligence in high risk situations or where there is suspicion of money laundering or terrorist financing. The judge also noted that, even in the absence of any specific concern, Member States may set higher levels of protection than mandated by MLD3. (Source: ECJ publishes MLD3 due diligence interpretation preliminary ruling)