EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-144/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administratīvā rajona tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 27 March 2020 — AS LatRailNet, VAS Latvijas dzelzceļš v Valsts dzelzceļa administrācija

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020CN0144

62020CN0144

March 27, 2020
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

15.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 201/18

(Case C-144/20)

(2020/C 201/26)

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: AS LatRailNet, VAS Latvijas dzelzceļš

Defendant: Valsts dzelzceļa administrācija

Questions referred

1.Must Article 56(2) of Directive [2012/34] (1) be interpreted as meaning that it confers on the regulatory body the power to adopt on its own initiative a decision ordering the undertaking performing the essential functions of a railway infrastructure manager, as mentioned in Article 7(1) of that directive, to make to provisions relating to the calculation of infrastructure charges (the charging scheme) certain amendments that are unrelated to discrimination against applicants?

2.If the first question is answered in the affirmative, is the regulatory body empowered to set out, in that decision, the conditions that must be laid down by such amendments, for example by laying down an obligation to exclude from the criteria for determining infrastructure charges pre-scheduled costs covered by the State budget or by local authority budgets which passenger transport operators cannot meet out of transport revenue?

3.Must Article 32(1) of Directive [2012/34] be interpreted as meaning that the obligation imposed on Member States in that paragraph to guarantee optimal competitiveness of rail market segments, by establishing mark-ups on infrastructure charges, also applies to the determination of infrastructure charges in market segments where there is no competition, because, for example, in the market segment concerned, transport is delivered exclusively by a single rail operator which has been given the exclusive right under Article 2(f) of Regulation No 1370/2007 (2) to provide transport in that market segment?

(1) Directive 2012/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 establishing a single European railway area (OJ 2012 L 343, p. 32).

(2) Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) Nos 1191/69 and 1107/70 (OJ 2007 L 315, p. 1).

*

Language of the case: Latvian

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia