This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62015CB0369
Joined Cases C-369/15 to C-372/15: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 October 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Siderúrgica Sevillana SA (C-369/15), Solvay Solutions Espana SL (C-370/15) Cepsa Química SA (C-371/15), Dow Chemical Ibérica SL (C-372/15) v Administración del Estado (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — System for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading in the European Union — Directive 2003/87/EC — Article 10a — Method for allocating quotas free of charge — Calculation of the uniform cross-sectoral correction factor — Decision 2013/448/EU — Article 4 — Annex II — Validity — Application of the uniform cross-sectoral correction factor to plants in sectors subject to a high risk of carbon leaks — Decision 2-11/278/EU — Article 10(9) — Validity)
Joined Cases C-369/15 to C-372/15: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 October 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Siderúrgica Sevillana SA (C-369/15), Solvay Solutions Espana SL (C-370/15) Cepsa Química SA (C-371/15), Dow Chemical Ibérica SL (C-372/15) v Administración del Estado (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — System for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading in the European Union — Directive 2003/87/EC — Article 10a — Method for allocating quotas free of charge — Calculation of the uniform cross-sectoral correction factor — Decision 2013/448/EU — Article 4 — Annex II — Validity — Application of the uniform cross-sectoral correction factor to plants in sectors subject to a high risk of carbon leaks — Decision 2-11/278/EU — Article 10(9) — Validity)
Joined Cases C-369/15 to C-372/15: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 October 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Siderúrgica Sevillana SA (C-369/15), Solvay Solutions Espana SL (C-370/15) Cepsa Química SA (C-371/15), Dow Chemical Ibérica SL (C-372/15) v Administración del Estado (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — System for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading in the European Union — Directive 2003/87/EC — Article 10a — Method for allocating quotas free of charge — Calculation of the uniform cross-sectoral correction factor — Decision 2013/448/EU — Article 4 — Annex II — Validity — Application of the uniform cross-sectoral correction factor to plants in sectors subject to a high risk of carbon leaks — Decision 2-11/278/EU — Article 10(9) — Validity)
OJ C 14, 16.1.2017, p. 18–19
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
16.1.2017 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 14/18 |
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 October 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Siderúrgica Sevillana SA (C-369/15), Solvay Solutions Espana SL (C-370/15) Cepsa Química SA (C-371/15), Dow Chemical Ibérica SL (C-372/15) v Administración del Estado
(Joined Cases C-369/15 to C-372/15) (1)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - System for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading in the European Union - Directive 2003/87/EC - Article 10a - Method for allocating quotas free of charge - Calculation of the uniform cross-sectoral correction factor - Decision 2013/448/EU - Article 4 - Annex II - Validity - Application of the uniform cross-sectoral correction factor to plants in sectors subject to a high risk of carbon leaks - Decision 2-11/278/EU - Article 10(9) - Validity))
(2017/C 014/23)
Language of the case: Spanish
Referring court
Tribunal Supremo
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Siderúrgica Sevillana SA (C-369/15), Solvay Solutions Espana SL (C-370/15) Cepsa Química SA (C-371/15), Dow Chemical Ibérica SL (C-372/15)
Defendant: Administración del Estado
Interveners: Repsol Petróleo SA BP, Oil Espana SAU (C-371/15)
Operative part of the order
|
1. |
It is not apparent either from the provisions of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC, as amended by Directive 2009/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009, read in the light of Article 15(3) of Commission Decision 2011/278/EU of 27 April 2011 determining transitional Union-wide rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances pursuant to Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, nor from . 2013/448/EU: Commission Decision of 5 September 2013 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, that, when determining the maximum annual quantity of greenhouse gas emission allowances, the European Commission excluded emissions other than those attributable to electricity producers. |
|
2. |
Examination of question 3b has revealed nothing which affects the validity of Article 15(3) of Decision 2011/278. |
|
3. |
Examination of question 4 has revealed nothing to affect the validity of the first subparagraph of Article 10(9) of Decision 2011/278. |
|
4. |
Article 4 of and Annex H to Decision 2013/448 are invalid. |
|
5. |
The effects of the declaration of invalidity of Article 4 of and Annex H to Decision 2011/278 are limited in time and so, firstly, the declaration has no effects until the expiry of a period of 10 months, to run from the date of the delivery of the judgment of 28 April 2016, Borealis Polyolefine and Others (C-191/14, C-192/14, C-295/14, C-389/14 and C-391/14 to C-393/14, EU:C:2016:311), in order to permit the European Commission to adopt the measures necessary and, secondly, the measures adopted until that deadline on the basis of the invalidated provisions cannot be called into question. |