On 28 May 2020, Advocate General Pitruzzella delivered his Opinion in Chrysostomides. The case originated from the Cypriot financial crisis and the haircut of deposits that took place in the run-up to the financial assistance received by the country from the European Stability Mechanism in 2013. It concerns two appeals brought by the Council, supported by the Commission, against two judgments of the General Court in which the latter dismissed the objections of inadmissibility raised by the Council regarding actions for damages brought, inter alia, against the Euro-group. The present case is important insofar as it affords an opportunity to the ECJ for the first time to clarify whether the Euro-group is an institution within the meaning of Article 340(2) TFEU whose actions may trigger the non-contractual liability of the Union. In this brief commentary, we share some reflections on selected conclusions of the Opinion i.e. that the Euro-group is situated outside the EU legal order and that this finding does not interfere with the EU principle of effective judicial protection.