Judgment of the General Court Second Chamber, 8 February 2023, Aquind Ltd and Others v Commission, T-295/20
| Date | 08 February 2023 |
| Year | 2023 |
28
VI. ENERGY
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber), 8 February 2023, Aquind Ltd and Others
v Commission, T-295/20
Link to the full text of the judgment
amending the list of projects of common interest – Second paragraph of Article 172 TFEU – Refusal of a
Member State to give its approval to a proposed electricity interconnector with a view to granting the
status of a project of common interest – Non-inclusion by the Commission of the project in the amended
list – Obligation to state reasons – Principle of good administration – Equal treatment – Legal certainty –
Legitimate expectations – Proportionality – Article 10 of the Energy Charter Treaty
The applicants, Aquind Ltd, Aquind SAS and Aquind Energy Sàrl, are the promoters of a proposed
electricity interconnector connecting the electricity transmission systems of the United Kingdom and
France (‘the proposed Aquind interconnector’). Considered to be fundamental in the infrastructure
needed for the completion of the internal energy market, that project was included in the list of
‘projects of common interest’ (‘PCIs’) of the European Union by Delegated Regulation 2018/540.
46
Since that Union list of PCIs is to be drawn up every two years, the list established by Delegated
Regulation 2018/540 was replaced by the one established by Delegated Regulation 2020/389
47
(‘the
contested regulation’). The new list in annex to the contested regulation listed the proposed Aquind
interconnector as one of the projects which are no longer considered to be Union PCIs.
The applicants then brought an action before the General Court seeking annulment of the contested
regulation, in so far as it removes the proposed Aquind interconnector from the Union list of PCIs.
The Court dismisses that action in its entirety. In its judgment, it holds, inter alia, that where a
Member State decides to refuse the inclusion, in the list provided for in Regulation No 347/2013,
48
of
a PCI located in its territory, that Member State has a discretion in the matter which the European
Commission cannot call into question.
Findings of the General Court
In the first place, the Court examines the question whether the Commission’s statement of reasons
for not including the proposed Aquind interconnector in the contested regulation as a Union PCI, on
the basis of the French Republic’s refusal to give its approval to the inclusion of that project in the
Union list of PCIs, could be regarded as a sufficient statement of reasons.
49
In that regard, after recalling the wording of the second paragraph of Article 172 TFEU, according to
which guidelines and PCIs which relate to the territory of a Member State are to require that Member
State’s approval, the Court considers that, in view of its clear wording, which presents no difficulty in
interpretation, that provision confers a discretion on the Member State concerned to give its approval
46
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/540 of 23 November 2017 amending Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 of the European Parliament
and of the Council as regards the Union list of projects of common interest (OJ 2018 L 90, p. 38).
47
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/389 of 31 October 2019 amending Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 of the European Parliament
and of the Council as regards the Union list of projects of common interest (OJ 2020 L 74, p. 1).
48
Article 3 of Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2013 on guidelines for trans-European
energy infrastructure and repealing Decision No 1364/2006/EC and amending Regulations (EC) No 713/2009, (EC) No 714/2009 and (EC) No
715/2009 (OJ 2013 L 115, p. 39).
49
In the light of the settled case-law on the matter.
To continue reading
Request your trial