What is the link between Article 6 Section 3a of the Energy Law Act and Article 490 of the Civil Code regarding the right of a grid operator to suspend the supply of electricity? Case comment to the judgment of the Supreme Court Judgment of 5 June 2007 – GZE (Ref No. III SK 11/07)

• Main Author: Michał Będkowski-Kozioł
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: University of Warsaw 2008-11-01
• Series: Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
• Online Access: https://yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/images/yars2008_1_1/M-Bedkowski-Koziol.pdf
• ISSN: 1689-9024; 2545-0115

On 5 June 2007 the Supreme Court delivered a judgment that concluded a long lasting legal dispute between a grid operator – Górnośląski Zakład Energetyczny (hereafter, GZE), acting as the plaintiff in this case, and the President of the Polish Energy Regulatory Office (hereafter, URE), acting as the defendant. The judgment of the Supreme Court directly concerned an earlier decision taken by the President of URE, which adjudicated a contractual dispute between GZE and Huta Łaziska steelworks (customer seeking third party access) regarding the terms of a transmission services contract to be concluded between those two companies. The economic origin of the dispute lied in the fact that Huta Łaziska intended to purchase electricity from a “third” (independent) supplier – a power producing company Zakład Energetyczny Pątnów-Adamów-Konin. For that purpose, in 2003 and 2004, it entered into a third round of negotiations with GZE, the local grid operator for the southern part of Poland and the Silesian region, concerning the conclusion of a contract that would grant Huta Łaziska access to the grid belonging to GZE, which was necessary in order to obtain the electricity purchased from the alternative supplier.