- 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-756/24, Jelgavas autobusu parks: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 31 October 2024 – Sabiedrisko pakalpojumu regulēšanas komisija v SIA JELGAVAS AUTOBUSU PARKS
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0756
62024CN0756
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 series
—
C/2025/383
27.1.2025
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 31 October 2024 – Sabiedrisko pakalpojumu regulēšanas komisija v SIA ‘JELGAVAS AUTOBUSU PARKS’
(Case C-756/24, Jelgavas autobusu parks)
(C/2025/383)
Language of the case: Latvian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant and defendant at first instance:
Respondent on appeal and applicant at first instance:
SIA ‘JELGAVAS AUTOBUSU PARKS’
Questions referred
1.Must Article 7 of Directive (EU) 2019/944 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on common rules for the internal market for electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU (recast) (1) be interpreted as meaning that a ‘direct line’ constitutes an alternative form of electricity supply if a customer so wishes or, on the contrary, as meaning that a direct line is acceptable only in exceptional cases?
2.Must point 41 of Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2019/944 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on common rules for the internal market for electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU (recast) be interpreted as meaning that a ‘direct line’ can be understood to mean an electricity line that is intended to be used to connect an electricity producer connected to the distribution system with an electricity customer connected to the distribution system, if that customer is to maintain that connection to the distribution system as a back-up connection after the planned electricity line has been constructed, but is to be disconnected from the distribution system while electricity is being supplied to it from the electricity producer by means of that direct line?
3.Must the concept of ‘isolated customer’ used in point 41 of Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2019/944 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on common rules for the internal market for electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU (recast) be understood as meaning only a customer that is not connected to the distribution system and for which the distribution system operator is not in a position to ensure the necessary capacity through the construction of a connection at reasonable cost?
(1) OJ 2019 L 158, p. 125.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/383/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—
* * *
Language of the case: Latvian