In this online debate, we will discuss the latest energy sector decisions from the European Courts of Justice and consider the wider repercussions of these developments. Several important issues have been raised via the Courts in recent months and several further important rulings are expected in the coming weeks, including on dispute settlement, the Hinkley Point nuclear power plant, and EU state aid rules. We will present the key aspects of these cases, weigh the reasoning of the courts, and reflect on the implications of these decisions.

The cases we will address are:

·   Case C-238/18: GRDF SA v Eni Gas and Power France SA on dispute settlement and the extent of the powers of regulatory authorities

·   Case C-594/18 P: Austria v European Commission – an update on the ECJ’s review of the Hinkley Point judgment on state aid

·   Case T-479/11 – Case T-157/12 (appeal of Case C-438/16 P Commission v France and IFP Énergies Nouvelles) on state aid

‘Ones to Watch’:

·   Case C-705/19: AXPO Trading v Gestore dei Servizi Energetici SpA – GSE

·   Case T-300/19: Achema and Lifosa v Commission

We will be taking questions throughout the live session, but we also invite you to submit your questions in advance in the registration form.

More on ECJ Case Law

If you want to catch up on earlier CJEU developments in the year, you can watch a recording of our session from April 2020 here.

#FSRDebates

The focus of the debate series is on recent court cases, regulatory decisions, EU legislation, or public consultations to be discussed by a panel of experts. Learn more about the FSR series.

In this Debate we focus on the most appropriate regulatory regime for the infrastructure connecting offshore wind parks  to land. In particular, we will assess:

• Whether this infrastructure should be considered as a connection infrastructure for the wind farm or a network element subject to third party access obligations, or a direct line?
• Whether the regulatory treatment of this infrastructure depends on the distance of the wind park from shore or on the fact that the wind park is connected to more than one country and therefore its connection infrastructure could also be used as an interconnector between different countries;
• To what extent the exemption conditions set out in Article 63(1) of the Electricity Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2019/943) could apply to this infrastructure if were not to be considered aa new ‘interconnector’?  What scope is there for national policy?

Watch the recording:

Programme

Introduction to the Debate | Leigh Hancher | Florence School of Regulation and Tilburg University

The offshore strategy | Joachim Balke | DG ENER

Regulatory Principles for a Meshed Offshore Grid | Pradyumna Bhagwat | Florence School of Regulation

Panel discussion moderated by Alberto Pototschnig | Florence School of Regulation

Introductory remarks
Carsten Smidt | DUR (Danish NRA) 
Dirk Van Hertem |KU Leuven
Anders Skanlund  | ENTSO-E
Ursula Prall | Becker Büttner Held, Hamburg

Polls for the audience and comments on the outcome

Joachim Balke | DG ENER, European Commission

Concluding remarks

Leigh Hancher | Florence School of Regulation and Tilburg University
Alberto Pototschnig | Florence School of Regulation

#FSRDebates

The focus of the debate series is on recent court cases, regulatory decisions, EU legislation, or public consultations to be discussed by a panel of experts. Learn more about the FSR series.

EU Hydrogen Strategy

The regulation of hydrogen infrastructure

In the first debate of the series, we will aim to tackle the fundamental question of whether the future hydrogen infrastructure will inevitably exhibit similar features to the natural gas and electricity networks and should be regulated in a similar way.

Watch the recording:

In this context, we will try to address the following questions:

• Should regulation disincentivise parallel delivery networks, reserving a preference for existing TSOs to replace/upgrade existing networks or should regulation foster competing networks?
• Will the hydrogen network necessarily exhibit the same ‘essential facility’ features – i.e. that it not easily or economically duplicated and tends to be a natural monopoly – so that access conditions and tariffs need to be regulated?
• Should the regulation follow the same approach as for gas? Ex ante regulation as opposed to ex-post tariff control?

#FSRDebates

The event will be hosted by the FSR Energy Union Law Director, Leigh Hancher.

Programme:

14.00 – 14.05   Introduction to the Debate

Alberto Pototschnig | Florence School of Regulation

14.05 – 14.15   The EU Hydrogen Strategy

Tudor Constantinescu | DG ENER, European Commission

14.15 – 14.25   The Hydrogen Sector cost structure

Piero Dos Reis | Florence School of Regulation

Panel Discussion: Introductory Remarks, Polls, and Comments

Moderator:  Leigh Hancher | Florence School of Regulation and Tilburg University

14.25 – 14.45    Introductory remarks
Christopher Jones| Florence School of Regulation
Jorgo Chatzimarkakis | Hydrogen Europe 
Stephan Kamphues | ENTSOG
Anneke Francois | ACM (Dutch NRA)

14.45 – 15.20    Polls and Q&A from the audience

15.20 – 15.30    Concluding remarks

Tudor Constantinescu | DG ENER, European Commission
Leigh Hancher | Florence School of Regulation and Tilburg University
Alberto Pototschnig | Florence School of Regulation

More about the FSR series

Started in September 2020, the new FSR series cover a wide range of topics and formats to meet the changing needs of the energy sector and the interests of our audience, across cutting-edge research, regulatory debate, and policy dialogue.

The focus of the debate series is on recent court cases, regulatory decisions, EU legislation, or public consultations to be discussed by a panel of experts.

Hosts: Prof. Leigh Hancher and Prof. Alberto Pototschnig