Sweden / Administrative Court of Appeal in Jönköping / Case No. 1266-23
-
Sweden / Administrative Court of Appeal in Jönköping / Case No. 1266-23
Key facts of the case:
In October 2021, Energinet (a company responsible for the energy transmission system in Denmark) issued a complaint against E.ON AB (an energy distribution company) to the Energy Markets Inspectorate (Energimarknadsinspektionen), a Swedish dispute resolution authority. Energinet complained that E.ONs collection of network charges for energy cables running between Sweden and Denmark was a breach of EU internal market regulations. The Inspectorate investigated the claims and ultimately closed the case without taking further action. Energinet appealed the decision to the Administrative District Court (Förvaltningsrätten). The Inspectorate argued that the decision was not subject to appeal. The Court rejected Energinet’s right to appeal the decision. In the Administrative Court of Appeal (Kammarrätten), Energinet argued that they had been denied the right to an effective remedy as per Article 47 of the Charter. The Court of Appeal ultimately agreed with the District Court and rejected Energinet’s right to appeal the original decision.
The administrative law regarding the right to appeal states that a party has the right to appeal if the decision made can be assumed to affect a party’s situation in a not insignificant way. It follows from case law that only administrative decisions that have or are likely to have a demonstrable effect on the party affected by the decision are granted appealability. Therefore, the court argued that there is an objective threshold which needs to be met by a party to appeal, which was not met in this case.
Key legal question raised by the Court:
The key legal question is whether an appeal can be lodged against the Inspectorates decision to close the case against E.ON.
Outcome of the case:
The Administrative Court of Appeal highlights the domestic mechanisms of recourse that are available to Energinet, which consist of appealing to the Administrative District Court. The Court adds that according to applicable administrative law, a party has the right to appeal if the decision made can be assumed to affect a party’s situation in a not insignificant way. The Court states that this fulfils the Charter obligation of right to an effective remedy. The Court goes on to argue that case law has interpreted the law to mean that administrative decisions which have or are likely to have a demonstrable effect on the party affected by the decision are granted appealability. The Court argues that there is an objective threshold which needs to be met by a party for appealability and which was not met in this case. The court concludes by highlighting that this interpretation of domestic law is in conformity with EU law.
The judgement resulted in Energinet being denied the right to appeal the decision made by the Inspectorate regarding their complaint against E.ON. -
Paragraphs referring to EU Charter
4. Mechanisms at the Swedish level exist through provisions on supervision in Chapter 12 of the Electricity Act (1997:857). In Chapter 13 of the same Act, among other things, the possibility to appeal the supervisory authority's decision to a general administrative court has been introduced. Furthermore, according to Section 41 of the Administrative Procedure Act, a decision may be appealed if the decision is assumed to affect someone's situation in a not insignificant way. These rules collectively correspond to the right to an effective remedy in Article 47 of the EU Charter.
-
Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)
4. Mekanismer på svensk nivå finns genom bestämmelser om tillsyn i 12 kap. ellagen (1997:857) och i 13 kap. samma lag har bl.a. möjligheten att överklaga tillsynsmyndighetens beslut till allmän förvaltningsdomstol införts. Av 41 § förvaltningslagen följer vidare att ett beslut får överklagas om beslutet kan antas påverka någons situation på ett inte obetydligt sätt. Dessa regler svarar sammantaget upp mot rätten till effektivt rättsmedel i artikel 47 i EU-stadgan.