This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014CN0397
Case C-397/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 20 August 2014 — Polkomtel Sp. z o.o. v Prezes Urzędu Komunikacji Elektronicznej
Case C-397/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 20 August 2014 — Polkomtel Sp. z o.o. v Prezes Urzędu Komunikacji Elektronicznej
Case C-397/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 20 August 2014 — Polkomtel Sp. z o.o. v Prezes Urzędu Komunikacji Elektronicznej
OJ C 431, 1.12.2014, p. 9–9
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
1.12.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 431/9 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 20 August 2014 — Polkomtel Sp. z o.o. v Prezes Urzędu Komunikacji Elektronicznej
(Case C-397/14)
(2014/C 431/14)
Language of the case: Polish
Referring court
Sąd Najwyższy
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Polkomtel Sp. z o.o.
Defendant: Prezes Urzędu Komunikacji Elektronicznej
Intervening party: Telekomunikacja Polska S.A. (now Orange Polska S.A.), whose seat is in Warsaw
Questions referred
|
1. |
Must Article 28 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), (1) in its initial version, be interpreted as meaning that it is necessary to ensure that not only end-users from other Member States, but also end-users from the Member State of a particular public communications network operator, have access to non-geographic numbers, with the result that the national regulatory authority’s assessment of whether that obligation has been fulfilled is subject to the requirements arising from the principle of effectiveness of EU law and the principle of interpreting national law in conformity with EU law? |
|
2. |
If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, must Article 28 of Directive 2002/22, read in conjunction with Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, be interpreted as meaning that, in order to fulfil the obligation referred to in the first of those provisions, it is possible to use the procedure laid down for national regulatory authorities in Article 5(1) of Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities (Access Directive)? (2) |
|
3. |
Must Article 8(3) of Directive 2002/19, read in conjunction with Article 28 of Directive 2002/22 and Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, or Article 8(3) of Directive 2002/19, read in conjunction with Article 5(1) of Directive 2002/19 and Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, be interpreted as meaning that, in order to ensure that the end-users of a national public communications network operator have access to services using non-geographic numbers supplied on the network of another national operator, the national regulatory authority may lay down rules governing the payment of operators for call origination by having recourse to the call termination rates set in respect of one of those operators which are cost orientated pursuant to Article 13 of Directive 2002/19, where the operator proposed that such a rate be applied during failed negotiations held to fulfil the obligation laid down in Article 4 of Directive 2002/19? |