In a judgment of 26 February 2019, the Court of Justice, for the first time in its history, annulled a measure emanating from a national authority within the framework of the European System of Central Banks (‘ESCB’). This is a procedure specific to the ESCB, which, pursuant to Article 14.2 of the Protocol on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank (‘the Statute of the ESCB and of the ECB’) provides that where a governor of a national central bank is relieved from office by a national decision, an appeal against that decision may be brought before the Court of Justice. That action is subject to the same time-limits as the action for annulment and is based on the plea alleging infringement of the Treaties or of any rule of law relating to their application. It consists of a review of the legality of a national decision by the Courts of the European Union. In the judgment under consideration, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice was called upon to rule on the legality of a decision of the Latvian Bureau for Prevention and Combating Corruption (Korupcijas novēršanas un apkarošanas birojs, hereinafter ‘KNAB’) to suspend the Governor of the Central Bank of Latvia from office on grounds of corruption. This case is part of a challenging overall context in Latvia, where the main bank in ABLV was suspended from its financial liabilities by an ECB decision of February 2018 for suspicions of money laundering. It is also the sensitivity of the case that Mr Rimšēvičs, in his capacity as Governor of a national central bank of a euro area Member State, is also a member of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank. After classifying the action in the present case as an action for annulment, the Court of Justice annulled the contested national decision. The novelty of this direct censorship of national law by means of hitherto unused proceedings must first be noted (I) before then measuring the scope of the solution adopted by the Court of Justice (II).