- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-34/20: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Köln — Germany) — Telekom Deutschland GmbH v Bundesrepublik Deutschland, represented by the Bundesnetzagentur für Elektrizität, Gas, Telekommunikation, Post und Eisenbahnen (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Electronic communications — Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 — Article 3 — Open internet access — Article 3(1) — End users’ rights — Article 3(2) — Prohibition of agreements and commercial practices limiting the exercise of end users’ rights — Article 3(3) — Obligation of equal and non-discriminatory treatment of traffic — Possibility of implementing reasonable traffic management measures — Additional ‘zero tariff’ option — Limitation on bandwidth)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020CA0034
62020CA0034
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C 462/17
(Case C-34/20) (<a id="ntc1-C_2021462EN.01001701-E0001" href="#ntr1-C_2021462EN.01001701-E0001">(<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)</a>)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Electronic communications - Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 - Article 3 - Open internet access - Article 3(1) - End users’ rights - Article 3(2) - Prohibition of agreements and commercial practices limiting the exercise of end users’ rights - Article 3(3) - Obligation of equal and non-discriminatory treatment of traffic - Possibility of implementing reasonable traffic management measures - Additional ‘zero tariff’ option - Limitation on bandwidth)
(2021/C 462/15)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Telekom Deutschland GmbH
Defendant: Bundesrepublik Deutschland, represented by the Bundesnetzagentur für Elektrizität, Gas, Telekommunikation, Post und Eisenbahnen
Operative part of the judgment
Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 laying down measures concerning open internet access and amending Directive 2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services and Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union must be interpreted as meaning that a limitation on bandwidth, on account of the activation of a ‘zero tariff’ option, applied to video streaming, irrespective of whether it is streamed by partner operators or other content providers, is incompatible with the obligations arising from Article 3(3).
Language of the case: German
* * *
(<span class="oj-super">1</span>) <a href="./../../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2020:137:TOC">OJ C 137, 27.4.2020</a>.
ECLI:EU:C:2021:140