CELEX: 62020CA0144
Language: en
Date: 2021-09-09 00:00:00
Title: Case C-144/20: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administratīvā rajona tiesa — Latvia) — AS ‘LatRailNet’, ‘Latvijas dzelzceļš’ VAS v Valsts dzelzceļa administrācija (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rail transport — Directive 2012/34/EU — Articles 32 and 56 — Railway infrastructure charging — Independence of the infrastructure manager — Functions of the regulatory body — Concept of ‘optimal competitiveness of rail market segments’ — Exclusive right to a rail segment — Public service operator)

22.11.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 471/6
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administratīvā rajona tiesa — Latvia) — AS ‘LatRailNet’, ‘Latvijas dzelzceļš’ VAS v Valsts dzelzceļa administrācija
      (Case C-144/20) (1)
      
      (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Rail transport - Directive 2012/34/EU - Articles 32 and 56 - Railway infrastructure charging - Independence of the infrastructure manager - Functions of the regulatory body - Concept of ‘optimal competitiveness of rail market segments’ - Exclusive right to a rail segment - Public service operator)
      (2021/C 471/07)
      Language of the case: Latvian
      
         Referring court
      
      Administratīvā rajona tiesa
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicants: AS ‘LatRailNet’, ‘Latvijas dzelzceļš’ VAS
      
         Defendant: Valsts dzelzceļa administrācija
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Article 56 of Directive 2012/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 establishing a single European railway area must be interpreted as conferring on the regulatory body the power to adopt, on its own initiative, a decision requiring the undertaking performing the essential functions of the railway infrastructure manager, as referred to in Article 7(1) of that directive, to make certain changes to the infrastructure charging scheme, even though it does not imply discrimination against applicants.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Article 56 of Directive 2012/34 must be interpreted as meaning that the conditions to be introduced into a charging scheme which the regulatory body is empowered to impose on the undertaking performing the essential functions of the railway infrastructure manager must be motivated by the infringement of Directive 2012/34 and be limited to remedying situations of incompatibility and may not involve discretionary assessments by that body which affect that manager’s discretion.
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Article 32(1) of Directive 2012/34 must be interpreted as applying, including with regard to the criterion of optimal competitiveness of rail market segments, to rail market segments without competition, in particular where they are operated by a public service operator which under a public service contract has been granted an exclusive right within the meaning of Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) Nos 1191/69 and 1107/70.
               
            
         (1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.