CJEU Case C-797/23 / Opinion

Meta Platforms Ireland Limited v Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni
Deciding body type
Court of Justice of the European Union
Deciding body
Opinion of Advocate General Szpunar
Type
Opinion
Decision date
10/07/2025
ECLI (European case law identifier)
ECLI:EU:C:2025:552

Title II: Freedoms

Article 16 - Freedom to conduct a business

Title VII: General provisions

Article 52 - Scope and interpretation

VIEW FULL CASE
  • CJEU Case C-797/23 / Opinion

    Key facts of the case:

    Reference for a preliminary ruling – Intellectual property – Copyright and related rights – Directive (EU) 2019/790 – Article 15 – Protection of press publications concerning online uses – National legislation providing for the publishers of those publications to be entitled to ‘fair compensation’ – Obligations imposed on information society service providers – Powers conferred on an independent administrative authority – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 16 – Freedom to conduct a business – Limitation on the exercise of that freedom – Article 52(1) – Justification – Weighing of that freedom against other fundamental rights – Article 11(2) – Freedom and pluralism of the media – Article 17(2) – Protection of intellectual property.

    Outcome of the case:

    In the light of all of the foregoing considerations, I propose that the Court answer the questions referred for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Regional Administrative Court, Lazio, Italy) as follows:

    Article 15 of Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC, and Articles 16 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

    must be interpreted as not precluding national provisions of a Member State which

    • confer on press publishers the right to obtain fair remuneration in return for authorising information society service providers to use their publications,
    • impose on information society service providers wishing to use such publications certain obligations concerning negotiations with publishers, disclosure of information and good faith during negotiations,
    • confer on a public entity the power to regulate, monitor and penalise, including the option to propose criteria for determining the remuneration due to publishers or the amount of that remuneration,

    provided that those provisions do not deprive press publishers of the possibility of refusing to grant such authorisation or that of granting it free of charge, that they do not impose on information society service providers any payment obligation unrelated to the actual or intended use of such publications, and that they do not restrict the contractual freedom of the parties in a binding manner

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    63. By its third question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Articles 16 and 52 of the Charter and ‘the [principle] … of free competition, referred to in Article 109 TFEU’ must be interpreted as precluding national provisions, as described in point 62 of this Opinion, adopted to transpose Article 15 of Directive 2019/790.

    ...

    65. Since neither Article 119 TFEU nor, still less, Article 109 TFEU are relevant for the purposes of the review of the conformity of the national provisions at issue in the main proceedings, I shall confine my analysis of the third question to the provisions of the Charter alone.

    66. Article 16 of the Charter provides that ‘the freedom to conduct a business in accordance with Union law and national laws and practices is recognised’. (26) The Court has already had occasion to observe that, having regard to the wording of that provision, which differs from the wording of the other fundamental freedoms laid down in Title II thereof, yet is similar to that of certain provisions of Title IV of the Charter, the freedom to conduct a business may be subject to a broad range of interventions on the part of public authorities which may limit the exercise of economic activity in the public interest and must be viewed in relation to its social function. That circumstance is reflected, inter alia, in the way in which Article 52(1) of the Charter requires the principle of proportionality to be implemented. (27) Moreover, a fair balance must be struck between the freedom to conduct a business and other fundamental rights, in particular the protection of intellectual property, enshrined in Article 17(2) of the Charter. (28)

    ...

    71. Accordingly, I am of the view that Article 16 of the Charter, together with Article 52 thereof, which merely confirms the possibility, inherent in the freedom to conduct a business, of providing for limitations on the rights enshrined in the Charter, must be interpreted as not precluding national provisions, as described in point 62 of this Opinion, subject to the conditions set out therein.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)