Help us make the FRA website better for you!

Take part in a one-to-one session and help us improve the FRA website. It will take about 30 minutes of your time.

YES, I AM INTERESTED NO, I AM NOT INTERESTED

CJEU Case C-578/18 / Opinion

Proceedings brought by Energiavirasto
Deciding body type
Court of Justice of the European Union
Deciding body
Advocate General
Type
Opinion
Decision date
24/10/2019
ECLI (European case law identifier)
ECLI:EU:C:2019:899

Karta tad-Drittijiet Fundamentali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

Title VI: Justice

Article 47 - Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial

VIEW FULL CASE
  • CJEU Case C-578/18 / Opinion

    Key facts of the case:

    Reference for a preliminary ruling — Internal market in electricity — Directive 2009/72/EC — Article 3 — Consumer protection — Article 37 — Tasks and powers of the regulatory authority — Out-of-court dispute settlement — Concept of ‘party’ — Right to appeal against a decision of the regulatory authority — Complaint made by a household customer against an electricity distribution system operator.

    Outcome of the case:

    In light of the foregoing considerations, I propose that the Court should answer the questions referred by the Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Supreme Administrative Court, Finland) as follows:

    Article 37(17) of Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 2003/54/EC must be interpreted as meaning that a consumer customer of an electricity network company in the circumstances of the main proceedings cannot be considered to be a ‘party affected by a decision of a regulatory authority’ for the purposes of that provision.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    48) According to settled case-law, the principle of effective judicial protection is a general principle of EU law stemming from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, which has been enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights and which has also been reaffirmed by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, along with the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, pursuant to which the Member States must ensure judicial protection of an individual’s rights under EU law. ( 29 ) It follows that, even though it is in principle for national law to determine an individual’s standing and legal interest in bringing proceedings, EU law nonetheless requires, inter alia, that the national legislation does not undermine the right to effective judicial protection. ( 30 ) Importantly, as the Court has ruled starting in Unibet, ( 31 ) the Member States are only obliged to create new legal remedies under national law to ensure effective judicial protection for an individual’s rights under EU law when none exist.