Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2008:298
Date: 2008-05-22
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Third Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Energy;Right of establishment;Freedom to provide services
Concepts: Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice;Energy
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Judgment 1. Preliminary rulings – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits (Art. 234 EC) 2. Approximation of laws – Measures for the establishment and functioning of the internal market in electricity (European Parliament and Council Directive 2003/54, Arts 2, point 5, and 20(1)) 3. Approximation of laws – Measures for the establishment and functioning of the internal market in electricity (European Parliament and Council Directive 2003/54, Art. 20(1)) 1. A question referred by a national court asking, in the context of dispute relating to a challenge made by an electricity supplier to an exemption granted under a provision of national law to certain operators of energy supply systems from having to allow open access to their systems, whether the provisions of a directive preclude that derogating system, which grants that exemption without the technical capacities of those systems having to be taken into account, is relevant, not hypothetical, and is for that reason admissible. (see paras 33, 35-36) 2. The principle of open access, which constitutes one of the essential measures which the Member States are required to implement in order to bring about the internal market in electricity, applies, according to Article 20(1) of Directive 2003/54 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity, to electricity transmission and distribution systems. A network which is located on a geographically connected operation zone and predominantly serves to supply the energy needs of an undertaking and of connected undertakings and which transports, for supply to clients, electricity which is not at extra-high or high voltage, irrespective of the quantity of electricity transported over that network and irrespective of the fact that the operation of that network is merely an activity ancillary to the main activity of that undertaking, falls within the scope of that provision and is therefore an electricity distribution system within the meaning of point 5 of Article 2 of Directive 2003/54. (see paras 44-48, 54) 3. Article 20(1) of Directive 2003/54 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity must be interpreted as precluding a provision of national legislation which exempts certain operators of energy supply systems from the obligation to provide third parties with open access to those systems on the grounds that they are located on a geographically connected operation zone and that they predominantly serve to supply the energy needs of the undertaking itself and of connected undertakings. Although that provision leaves the Member States free to take the measures necessary to establish a system of third-party access to transmission or distribution systems and although, consequently, the Member States have authority over the form and the methods to be used to implement such a system, the fact remains that, having regard to the importance of the principle of open access to transmission or distribution systems, that margin of discretion does not authorise them to depart from that principle except in those cases where the directive lays down exceptions or derogations. Such is not the case where a provision of national legislation does not come within the scope of any of the exceptions or derogations from that principle laid down by the directive, whether – first, that established by Article 20(2) of Directive 2003/54, which, in order to permit the operator of a distribution system to refuse access to its network where it lacks the necessary capacity, requires reasons and justification which can be assessed on a case-by-case basis and does not authorise the Member States to lay down general derogations without a concrete assessment of that incapacity or, – secondly, the derogation established by Article 3(8) of the directive since, on the one hand, the derogation laid down by the legislation at issue is not justified by the risk that the operators of systems would be prevented from performing their public-service obligations by the fact of that open access and, on the other, that derogation can be justified only by the geographical or legal configuration of the area in which those systems are operated, or, – lastly, by application of Article 26(1) of the directive, which lays down derogations from Article 20 thereof, justified by substantial problems caused for the operation of small isolated systems, since the necessary agreement of the Commission, which takes the form of a decision published in the Official Journal of the European Union, has been neither sought nor obtained by the Member State whose legislation is at issue. (see paras 55, 57-58, 60-65, operative part)