62023CJ0048_RES
Case C‑48/23
Alajärven Sähkö Oy and OthersandElenia Verkko Oyj
v
Energiavirasto
(Request for a preliminary ruling from the markkinaoikeus)
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 March 2025
(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Internal market for electricity – Directive (EU) 2019/944 – Article 57(4) and (5) – Independence of national regulatory authority in the exercise of its duties and powers – Policy guidelines issued by a Member State – Legislative amendment aimed at reducing electricity distribution prices – Decision concerning methods for monitoring electricity system operation charges taken by the regulatory authority concerned following that amendment – Account taken of the travaux préparatoires relating to the law that introduced that amendment)
Energy – Internal market for electricity – Directive 2019/944 – Regulatory authorities – Independence – Obligations of the Member States – Scope – Adoption of a law whose purpose is to influence electricity distribution prices – No provisions governing electricity transmission or distribution tariffs – Changes to the methods for monitoring electricity system operation tariffs decided on by the national regulatory authority following the entry into force of that law – Failure by the Member State in its obligation to respect the independence of national regulatory authority – None
(European Parliament and Council Directive 2019/944, Art. 57(4) and (5) and Art. 59)
(see paragraphs 29-47, operative part)
Résumé
Hearing a reference for a preliminary ruling from the markkinaoikeus (Market Court, Finland), the Court of Justice gives a ruling on the scope of the obligation of Member States to respect the independence of national regulatory authorities in the performance of the tasks conferred upon them by Directive 2019/944 on common rules for the internal market for electricity. (
1
)
By a number of decisions adopted in December 2021 (‘the contested decisions’), the Finnish regulatory authority amended the methods for monitoring electricity system operation charges it had fixed in 2015, for the period between 1 January 2022 and 31 December 2023. According to the explanations provided in those decisions, that authority made that amendment on its own initiative following the entry into force of Law 730/2021, (
2
) which extended the implementation period of certain requirements relating to construction and maintenance of the electricity system.
In that regard, the markkinaoikeus (Market Court) states that it is apparent from the travaux préparatoires for Law 730/2021 that its purpose was to bring about a reduction in electricity distribution prices, without, as such, containing provisions specifically governing electricity transmission or distribution tariffs or the calculation methods thereof.
Two Finnish undertakings, electricity system operators, brought an action before the markkinaoikeus (Market Court), seeking annulment of the contested decisions in so far as they changed the methods for monitoring electricity system operation charges. Referring to the connection between Law 730/2021 and the contested decisions, those undertakings submit, inter alia, that the Finnish regulatory authority did not adopt those decisions independently, in accordance with the requirements laid down in that regard by Directive 2019/944.
In view of that complaint, the markkinaoikeus (Market Court) decided to ask the Court, in essence, whether, given the connection between the entry into force of Law 730/2021 and the adoption of the contested decisions by the Finnish regulatory authority, Article 57(4) and (5) and Article 59 of Directive 2019/944 precluded national legislation such as Law 730/2021.
Findings of the Court
As a preliminary point, the Court observes that, under Article 57(4) of Directive 2019/944, Member States are to guarantee the independence of the regulatory authority in the performance of the regulatory tasks conferred upon it by that directive and related legislation. In addition, under Article 57(5)(a) of that directive, in order to protect the independence of the regulatory authority, Member States are to ensure that that authority can take autonomous decisions, independently of any political body.
In that context, the Court finds, first, that the independence of regulatory authorities must be guaranteed both as regards economic actors and public entities, be they administrative bodies or political bodies and, in the latter case, as regards both the government and the national legislature.
Second, the Court states that the powers reserved to the regulatory authorities are executive powers that are based on the technical and specialist assessment of factual realities and, in the exercise of those powers, those authorities are subject to principles and rules established by an equally detailed legislative framework at EU level, which limit their discretion and prevent them from making political choices.
Although, according to the wording of Article 59(1)(m) of Directive 2019/944, it is indeed for the regulatory authorities to ensure compliance with rules governing network security and reliability and to assess past performance, there is nothing in that wording to suggest that it falls within their competence to establish those rules.
In that regard, as is apparent from recital 87 of that directive and as provided for by the second paragraph of Article 194(2) TFEU, Member States have the right to determine the conditions for exploiting their energy resources. Consequently, Member States are free to adopt their own rules relating to the national electricity market, except as regards the duties and powers of the national regulatory authorities provided for by that same directive.
In that perspective, the exercise by a Member State of its powers to establish its national energy policy may have repercussions on the costs of operating the electricity system. Moreover, the mere fact that a Member State seeks, through the adoption of rules, to lower electricity distribution prices is not, as such, incompatible with Article 57(4) and (5) of Directive 2019/944.
That said, in view of Article 57(4) and (5) of Directive 2019/944, national regulatory measures which include detailed provisions specifically establishing the factors which are at the discretion of the national regulatory authority, such as tariff levels of the electricity system or the specific methods for calculating them, cannot be permitted.
However, the fact that the national legislature adopted a law amending the requirements relating to security of supply and that, as a result, those tariffs were modified by the regulatory authority, does not per se call into question the independence of that authority’s exercise of its powers.
In the light of those considerations, the Court holds that the answer to the questions referred is that Article 57(4) and (5)(a) of Directive 2019/944, read in conjunction with Article 59 thereof, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation whose purpose, as indicated in the travaux préparatoires relating thereto, is, inter alia, to influence electricity distribution prices without, as such, containing provisions specifically governing electricity transmission or distribution tariffs or the calculation methods thereof, but the effect of the entry into force of which has been that the national regulatory authority has changed its methods for monitoring electricity system operation tariffs before the expiry of the monitoring period ongoing on the date of that entry into force.
(
1
)	Directive (EU) 2019/944 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on common rules for the internal market for electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU (OJ 2019 L 158, p. 125).
(
2
)	Laki sähkömarkkinalain muuttamisesta (730/2021) (Law amending the Law on the electricity market (730/2021); ‘Law 730/2021’).