Case C‑242/17

Legatoria Editoriale Giovanni Olivotto (L.E.G.O.) SpA

v

Gestore dei servizi energetici (GSE) SpA and Others

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources — Bioliquids used for a thermal energy plant — Directive 2009/28/EC — Article 17 — Sustainability criteria for bioliquids — Article 18 — National sustainability certification systems — Implementing Decision 2011/438/EU — Voluntary sustainability certification systems for biofuels and bioliquids approved by the European Commission — National legislation requiring intermediary operators to submit sustainability certificates — Article 34 TFEU — Free movement of goods)

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 4 October 2018

1. Environment — Promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources — Directive 2009/28 — Verification of observance of the sustainability criteria for biofuels and bioliquids — National sustainability certification schemes — National legislation which imposes requirements on economic operators which, for the certification of the sustainability of bioliquids, are different from those imposed by a voluntary sustainability certification system approved by the Commission — Lawfulness — Conditions

   (European Parliament and Council Directive 2009/28, Arts 17(2) to (5), 18(1),(3), (4) and (7); Commission Decision 2011/438, Art. 1, first para.)

2. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Identification of the relevant elements of EU law — No reference in the order for reference — Irrelevant

3. Free movement of goods — Quantitative restrictions — Measures having equivalent effect — Directive 2009/28 — Verification of observance of the sustainability criteria for biofuels and bioliquids — National sustainability certification schemes — National legislation requiring intermediary operators to submit sustainability certificates — Not permissible — Justification — Protection of the environment and combating fraud — Proportionality

   (Art. 34 TFEU; Directive 2001/37 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Art. 18(1) and (3))

4. EU law — Implementation by Member States — Criteria for assessment — Domain not exhaustively harmonised by an act of secondary law — Implementation of a harmonising measure required to comply with EU law

   (Art. 34 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Directive 2009/28, Recital 25 and Art. 18)

1.  Article 18(7) of Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC, read in conjunction with Commission Implementing Decision 2011/438/EU of 19 July 2011 on the recognition of the ISCC (International Sustainability and Carbon Certification) system for demonstrating compliance with the sustainability criteria under Directives 2009/28/EC and 2009/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which imposes requirements on economic operators which, for the certification of the sustainability of bioliquids, are specific, different and more extensive than those imposed by a voluntary sustainability certification system, such as the ISCC system, recognised by that implementing decision, adopted by the European Commission in accordance with Article 18(4) of that directive, in so far as that system was approved only in respect of biofuels and in so far as those conditions concern only bioliquids.

   In that regard, Article 18(7) of that directive provides that, when an economic operator provides proof or data obtained in accordance with an agreement or scheme that has been the subject of a decision adopted by the Commission on the basis of Article 18(4) of Directive 2009/28, to the extent covered by that decision, a Member State cannot require the supplier to provide further evidence of compliance with the sustainability criteria set out in Article 17(2) to (5) of that directive. However, where the Commission has not adopted a decision in relation to a certain certification scheme, or where that decision specifies that the scheme does not cover all the sustainability criteria laid down in Article 17(2) to (5) of Directive 2009/28, Member States are free to require economic operators, to that extent, to comply with national provisions the aim of which is to ensure that fulfilment of those criteria is monitored. Accordingly, to the extent that the ISCC scheme that is the subject of Implementing Decision 2011/438 uses mass balance methodology to prove the sustainability of biofuels, it does not appear to limit the ability of Member States, under Article 18(1) and (3) of Directive 2009/28, to determine the procedures for verifying compliance with the sustainability criteria set out in Article 17(2) to (5) of Directive 2009/28 in relation to bioliquids.

   (see paras 33, 34, 36, 41, operative part 1)

2.  See the text of the decision.

   (see para. 43)

3.  EU law, in particular Article 34 TFEU and Article 18(1) and (3) of Directive 2009/28, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which imposes a national sustainability verification system for bioliquids under which all the economic operators involved in the supply chain of the product, even when they are intermediaries which do not take physical possession of the batches of bioliquids, are bound by certain requirements relating to certification, communication and the provision of information imposed by that system.

   (see paras 51, 72, operative part 2)

4.  See the text of the decision.

   (see paras 52-54)