Case C-205/23, Engie Romania: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 30 January 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Bucureşti – Romania) – Engie România SA v Autoritatea Naţională de Reglementare în Domeniul Energiei (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Energy – Internal market in natural gas – Directive 2009/73/EC – Article 3(1) – Obligations of Member States towards natural gas undertakings – Consumer protection – Articles 40 and 41 – Powers of the regulatory authority – Breach by a natural gas undertaking of its duty of transparency towards consumers – Duplication of penalties for the same unlawful conduct – Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence – Ne bis in idem – Article 52(1) – Limitations on the exercise of that fundamental right – Principle of proportionality)
Date: 2025-01-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative offence, administrative sanction, consumer protection, free price, gas supply, natural gas, price of energy, price regulations, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence








C_202502045EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2045


14.4.2025






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 30 January 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Bucureşti – Romania) – Engie România SA v Autoritatea Naţională de Reglementare în Domeniul Energiei


(Case C-205/23,
                (1)
Engie Romania)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Energy - Internal market in natural gas - Directive 2009/73/EC - Article 3(1) - Obligations of Member States towards natural gas undertakings - Consumer protection - Articles 40 and 41 - Powers of the regulatory authority - Breach by a natural gas undertaking of its duty of transparency towards consumers - Duplication of penalties for the same unlawful conduct - Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence - Ne bis in idem - Article 52(1) - Limitations on the exercise of that fundamental right - Principle of proportionality)
(C/2025/2045)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Bucureşti

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Engie România SA

Defendant: Autoritatea Naţională de Reglementare în Domeniul Energiei

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Directive 2009/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 2003/55/EC
must be interpreted as not precluding a national energy regulatory authority, where it finds that a natural gas supplier has failed to fulfil its duty of transparency with regard to its customers, when the price for the supply of that product is adjusted, from requiring that supplier to maintain the price set in the contracts initially concluded with those customers.










2.


Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union read in conjunction with Article 52(1) thereof,
must be interpreted as not precluding a natural gas supplier from being subject, on the basis of different national laws transposing, respectively, Directive 2009/73 and 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’) to two penalties which must be classified as ‘criminal penalties for identical facts’, provided that:






—


there are clear and precise rules making it possible to predict which acts or omissions may be subject to a duplication of proceedings and penalties, and to ensure coordination between the two competent authorities;










—


the two sets of proceedings concerned have been conducted in a sufficiently coordinated manner and within a proximate timeframe; and










—


all the penalties imposed correspond to the seriousness of the offences.










(1)  
            OJ C 252, 17.7.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2045/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)