CELEX: 62018CA0417
Language: en
Date: 2019-09-05 00:00:00
Title: Case C-417/18: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 5 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas — Lithuania) — AW, BV, CU, DT v Lietuvos valstybė, represented by the Lietuvos Respublikos ryšių reguliavimo tarnyba, the Bendrasis pagalbos centras and the Lietuvos Respublikos vidaus reikalų ministerija (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2002/22/EC – Universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services – Article 26(5) – Single European emergency call number – Making available caller location information)

11.11.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 383/30
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 5 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas — Lithuania) — AW, BV, CU, DT v Lietuvos valstybė, represented by the Lietuvos Respublikos ryšių reguliavimo tarnyba, the Bendrasis pagalbos centras and the Lietuvos Respublikos vidaus reikalų ministerija
      (Case C-417/18) (1)
      
      (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2002/22/EC - Universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services - Article 26(5) - Single European emergency call number - Making available caller location information)
      (2019/C 383/32)
      Language of the case: Lithuanian
      
         Referring court
      
      Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant: AW, BV, CU, DT
      
         Defendant: Lietuvos valstybė, represented by the Lietuvos Respublikos ryšių reguliavimo tarnyba, the Bendrasis pagalbos centras and the Lietuvos Respublikos vidaus reikalų ministerija
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Article 26(5) of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive), as amended by Directive 2009/136/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009, must be interpreted as requiring the Member States, subject to technical feasibility, to ensure that the undertakings concerned make caller location information available free of charge to the authority handling emergency calls to the single European emergency call number ‘112’ as soon as the call reaches that authority, including in cases where the call is made from a mobile telephone which is not fitted with a SIM card;
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Article 26(5) of Directive 2002/22, as amended by Directive 2009/136, must be interpreted as conferring on the Member States a measure of discretion when laying down the criteria relating to the accuracy and reliability of the information on the location of the caller to the single European emergency call number ‘112’; however, the criteria which they lay down must ensure, within the limits of technical feasibility, that the caller’s position is located as reliably and accurately as is necessary to enable the emergency services usefully to come to the caller’s assistance, this being a matter for the national court to assess;
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  EU law must be interpreted as meaning that where, in accordance with the domestic law of a Member State, the existence of an indirect causal link between the unlawful act committed by the national authorities and the damage sustained by an individual is regarded as sufficient to render the State liable, such an indirect causal link between a breach of EU law attributable to that Member State and the damage sustained by an individual must also be regarded as sufficient for the purposes of rendering that Member State liable for that breach of EU law.
               
            
         (1)  OJ C 352, 1.10.2018.