Post by nijhumnishita033 on Jan 11, 2024 10:41:30 GMT
The Supreme Court has declared that the financing mechanism of the social bonus established by Decree-Law in 2016 is contrary to the law of the European Union for discriminating against some companies in the electricity sector compared to others. The social bonus is a social benefit intended to protect certain consumers (“vulnerable consumers”) consisting of applying a discount to the price of electricity consumed in their habitual residence. The Supreme Court's decision annuls the financing mechanism intended to cover the cost of this discount, without affecting the continuity of its application.
In other countries of the European Union, they foresee that this cost will be financed from their general budgets, but Spain chose from the beginning to place this obligation on some companies in the electricity sector. On two Phone Number Data previous occasions the Supreme Court considered that the financing mechanism established by Spanish legislation was contrary to European Union law . The annulled financing system was now regulated by Royal Decree Law 7/2016, of December 23 , which imposed its cost on “the parent companies of the groups of companies that carry out the activity of marketing electrical energy or by the companies themselves that "They do so if they are not part of any corporate group," which meant allocating 94% of the financing cost to the marketing companies .
This financing system, like the previous two, has once again been considered contrary to European Union law due to the Supreme Court rulings that have just been announced. Court of Justice of the European Union (Photo: CJEU) The rulings are based on the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union , especially what was stated in its recent ruling of October 14, 2021 (Case C-683/19), which maintains that public service obligations, such as the one in question, should be imposed “ generally” on electrical companies and not on some specific companies.
In other countries of the European Union, they foresee that this cost will be financed from their general budgets, but Spain chose from the beginning to place this obligation on some companies in the electricity sector. On two Phone Number Data previous occasions the Supreme Court considered that the financing mechanism established by Spanish legislation was contrary to European Union law . The annulled financing system was now regulated by Royal Decree Law 7/2016, of December 23 , which imposed its cost on “the parent companies of the groups of companies that carry out the activity of marketing electrical energy or by the companies themselves that "They do so if they are not part of any corporate group," which meant allocating 94% of the financing cost to the marketing companies .
This financing system, like the previous two, has once again been considered contrary to European Union law due to the Supreme Court rulings that have just been announced. Court of Justice of the European Union (Photo: CJEU) The rulings are based on the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union , especially what was stated in its recent ruling of October 14, 2021 (Case C-683/19), which maintains that public service obligations, such as the one in question, should be imposed “ generally” on electrical companies and not on some specific companies.
