# C_2023007EN.01001801.xml

| 9.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/18

---

Action brought on 2 November 2022 — Republic of Poland v Council of the European Union

(Case C-675/22)

(2023/C 7/22)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Council Regulation (EU) 2022/1369 of 5 August 2022 on coordinated demand-reduction measures for gas (1) in its entirety; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Regulation (EU) 2022/1369 of 5 August 2022 on coordinated demand-reduction measures for gas (1) in its entirety;

| — | order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs;

| — | in the alternative, should the Court find that the legal basis of the contested regulation is correct, annul Article 5(1) and (2) of the contested regulation. |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, should the Court find that the legal basis of the contested regulation is correct, annul Article 5(1) and (2) of the contested regulation.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Republic of Poland raises the following pleas in respect of the contested regulation:

| 1. | Plea alleging that the legal basis for the adoption of the regulation was incorrect and, consequently, that Article 192(2)(c) TFEU, in conjunction with the second subparagraph of Article 194(2) thereof, was infringed in so far as the contested regulation was not adopted on the basis of Article 192(2)(c) TFEU, which requires the Council to act unanimously, despite the fact that that regulation significantly affects a Member State’s choice between different energy sources and the general structure of its energy supply.
  In respect of the contested regulation, Poland raises, first, the plea that its legal basis, namely Article 122(1) TFEU, is incorrect. Poland submits that the main objective of the contested regulation is to have a significant effect on the conditions for exploiting energy resources, the choice between different energy sources and the general structure of a Member State’s energy supply. Since that regulation significantly affects the freedom to shape the energy mix, it should have been adopted on the basis of Article 192(2)(c) TFEU, to which the second subparagraph of Article 194(2) TFEU refers, that is to say, in accordance with a special legislative procedure under which the Council acts unanimously. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Plea alleging that the legal basis for the adoption of the regulation was incorrect and, consequently, that Article 192(2)(c) TFEU, in conjunction with the second subparagraph of Article 194(2) thereof, was infringed in so far as the contested regulation was not adopted on the basis of Article 192(2)(c) TFEU, which requires the Council to act unanimously, despite the fact that that regulation significantly affects a Member State’s choice between different energy sources and the general structure of its energy supply.

In respect of the contested regulation, Poland raises, first, the plea that its legal basis, namely Article 122(1) TFEU, is incorrect. Poland submits that the main objective of the contested regulation is to have a significant effect on the conditions for exploiting energy resources, the choice between different energy sources and the general structure of a Member State’s energy supply. Since that regulation significantly affects the freedom to shape the energy mix, it should have been adopted on the basis of Article 192(2)(c) TFEU, to which the second subparagraph of Article 194(2) TFEU refers, that is to say, in accordance with a special legislative procedure under which the Council acts unanimously.

| 2. | Plea alleging breach of the principle of legal certainty by conferring on the EU institutions a discretionary power with regard to the triggering of a Union alert and by failing to explain how the measures contained in the regulation are intended to achieve its objectives. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Plea alleging breach of the principle of legal certainty by conferring on the EU institutions a discretionary power with regard to the triggering of a Union alert and by failing to explain how the measures contained in the regulation are intended to achieve its objectives.

| 3. | Plea alleging breach of the principle of energy solidarity. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Plea alleging breach of the principle of energy solidarity.

---

(1)  OJ 2022 L 206, p. 1.

---