# C_2016038EN.01002401.xml

| 1.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/24

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 4 November 2015 — Hans-Peter Ofenböck

(Case C-565/15)

(2016/C 038/35)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Party to the main proceedings

Party to the main proceedings

Appellant: Hans-Peter Ofenböck

Appellant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) (1) preclude the application of national legislation under which the freedom of service station operators to change fuel prices is restricted in such a way that they may lawfully increase the sale price only once a day? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) (1) preclude the application of national legislation under which the freedom of service station operators to change fuel prices is restricted in such a way that they may lawfully increase the sale price only once a day?

1

| 2. | If Question 1 cannot automatically be answered in the affirmative, and, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice, the examination of the lawfulness of such a restriction in the light of the provisions of Articles 5 to 9 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive must instead be conducted with reference to the circumstances of each individual case:
  Which factors would the case-by-case examination of the lawfulness of such a restriction in the light of the provisions of Articles 5 to 9 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, as required by the Court of Justice in the judgment in Case C-540/08, have to take into account in the case of a provision restricting the freedom to increase consumer prices? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If Question 1 cannot automatically be answered in the affirmative, and, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice, the examination of the lawfulness of such a restriction in the light of the provisions of Articles 5 to 9 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive must instead be conducted with reference to the circumstances of each individual case:

Which factors would the case-by-case examination of the lawfulness of such a restriction in the light of the provisions of Articles 5 to 9 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, as required by the Court of Justice in the judgment in Case C-540/08, have to take into account in the case of a provision restricting the freedom to increase consumer prices?

---

(1)  OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22.

1

---