4.7.2022
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 257/27
Question referred Is it possible to interpret Articles 1 to 3 of [Directive 2010/64/EU] (1) and Article 3 of [Directive 2012/13/EU] (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council, alone or in conjunction with Article 6 of the ECHR, as meaning that they do not preclude a provision of national law which imposes a penalty of relative nullity, which must be pleaded, for failure to appoint an interpreter and to translate essential procedural documents for an accused person who does not understand the language of the proceedings, and which permits the rectification of that type of nullity owing to the passage of time?
(1) (2)
Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings (OJ 2010 L 280, p. 1).
Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings (OJ 2012 L 142, p. 1).
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 22 April 2022 — Global NRG Kereskedelmi és Tanácsadó Zrt.
v Magyar Energetikai és Közmű-szabályozási Hivatal (Case C-277/22) (2022/C 257/35) Language of the case: Hungarian Referring court Fővárosi Törvényszék
Parties to the main proceedings Applicant: Global NRG Kereskedelmi és Tanácsadó Zrt.
Defendant: Magyar Energetikai és Közmű-szabályozási Hivatal Other party intervening in support of the defendant: FGSZ Földgázszállító Zrt.
Questions referred 1.
Must Article 41(17) of 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 (‘the Directive’) (1) be interpreted, in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, as meaning that it precludes national legislation according to which, in the procedures by which the regulatory authority of that Member State sets system usage charges, remuneration for any services provided by system operators under a special tariff and connection fees, only the system operator is recognised as a party directly affected and, as such, the only party having a right of appeal against a decision made in that procedure? 2.
If the Court answers the first question in the affirmative, must Article 41(17) of the Directive be interpreted, in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, as meaning that where that article is applied to a case such as that in the main proceedings, an actor in the natural gas market in a situation such as that of the applicant, which, under a decision by the regulatory authority of the Member State setting the system usage charges, remuneration for any services provided by system operators under a special tariff and connection fees, is charged a tariff by the system manager for a service that can be provided under a special tariff, must be found to be a party affected by that decision and, as such, to have a right of appeal against it?
(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 (OJ 2009 L 211, p. 94).