Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline:
Gespeichert in:
Format: | Elektronisch E-Book |
---|---|
Sprache: | English |
Veröffentlicht: |
Warszawa [Poland]
Ośrodek Studiów Wschodnich im. Marka Karpia
2019
|
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | BSB01 |
Beschreibung: | On 10 September, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) annulled a decision issued by the European Commission on 28 October 2016 allowing the Russian Gazprom to send greater volumes of gas through the OPAL pipeline. The CJEU judgment was issued following a complaint submitted on 16 December 2016 by Poland, supported by Lithuania and Latvia, against the Commission's decision, which on the other hand was formally supported by Germany. The CJEU found in favour of Poland and overturned the Commission's decision, saying that it had been issued in breach of the principle of energy solidarity provided for in art. 194 of the TFEU. The judgment means that the OPAL capacity available to Gazprom has now been reduced, effective immediately, by 12.8 bcm per year, as has transmission via Nord Stream and Germany, as a result. The judgment will probably remain in force, and this is a good outcome for Poland and all parties/sides interested in Gazprom's domineering position on the European gas market being reduced, and opposed to new Russian export pipelines such as Nord Stream 2 being built. The decision will hurt Germany above all, which benefits from the increasing volume of gas being sent through the country, but will also hurt the Czech Republic and other actors that buy gas via Nord Stream. At the same time, the decision exacerbates the already existing divisions between member states. The CJEU's judgment is evidently a blow to Gazprom and Russia, limiting Russia's export capacity at an already difficult time (talks to negotiate a gas deal with Ukraine, and winter approaching). If it remains in force, it will mean that in the next few years, Gazprom cannot afford to stop transit through Ukraine, which is one of the main objectives of Russia's energy policy. The ruling might also have negative consequences for Nord Stream 2, as there is less chance of the project being granted EU law exemptions. This also raises the question of if and how the principle of energy solidarity, reinforced by the CJEU ruling, can be applied to the project. For the duration, the ruling will strengthen Ukraine's position, and that of the EU as well, in talks with Russia about transit through Ukraine in the future and the forthcoming trilateral negotiations. At the same time, it could trigger some sort of retaliation on the part of Russia |
Beschreibung: | 1 Online-Ressource (8 Seiten) |
Internformat
MARC
LEADER | 00000nmm a2200000zc 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | BV049445972 | ||
003 | DE-604 | ||
005 | 20240315 | ||
007 | cr|uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 231204s2019 |||| o||u| ||||||eng d | ||
035 | |a (ZDB-45-CGR)ceeol834801 | ||
035 | |a (OCoLC)1414553962 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV049445972 | ||
040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e aacr | ||
041 | 0 | |a eng | |
049 | |a DE-12 | ||
084 | |a OST |q DE-12 |2 fid | ||
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline |
264 | 1 | |a Warszawa [Poland] |b Ośrodek Studiów Wschodnich im. Marka Karpia |c 2019 | |
264 | 2 | |a Frankfurt M. |b CEEOL |c 2019 | |
300 | |a 1 Online-Ressource (8 Seiten) | ||
336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a On 10 September, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) annulled a decision issued by the European Commission on 28 October 2016 allowing the Russian Gazprom to send greater volumes of gas through the OPAL pipeline. The CJEU judgment was issued following a complaint submitted on 16 December 2016 by Poland, supported by Lithuania and Latvia, against the Commission's decision, which on the other hand was formally supported by Germany. The CJEU found in favour of Poland and overturned the Commission's decision, saying that it had been issued in breach of the principle of energy solidarity provided for in art. 194 of the TFEU. The judgment means that the OPAL capacity available to Gazprom has now been reduced, effective immediately, by 12.8 bcm per year, as has transmission via Nord Stream and Germany, as a result. | ||
500 | |a The judgment will probably remain in force, and this is a good outcome for Poland and all parties/sides interested in Gazprom's domineering position on the European gas market being reduced, and opposed to new Russian export pipelines such as Nord Stream 2 being built. The decision will hurt Germany above all, which benefits from the increasing volume of gas being sent through the country, but will also hurt the Czech Republic and other actors that buy gas via Nord Stream. At the same time, the decision exacerbates the already existing divisions between member states. The CJEU's judgment is evidently a blow to Gazprom and Russia, limiting Russia's export capacity at an already difficult time (talks to negotiate a gas deal with Ukraine, and winter approaching). If it remains in force, it will mean that in the next few years, Gazprom cannot afford to stop transit through Ukraine, which is one of the main objectives of Russia's energy policy. | ||
500 | |a The ruling might also have negative consequences for Nord Stream 2, as there is less chance of the project being granted EU law exemptions. This also raises the question of if and how the principle of energy solidarity, reinforced by the CJEU ruling, can be applied to the project. For the duration, the ruling will strengthen Ukraine's position, and that of the EU as well, in talks with Russia about transit through Ukraine in the future and the forthcoming trilateral negotiations. At the same time, it could trigger some sort of retaliation on the part of Russia | ||
650 | 4 | |a Economic policy | |
650 | 4 | |a Environmental and Energy policy | |
650 | 4 | |a International relations/trade | |
650 | 4 | |a EU-Legislation | |
650 | 4 | |a Geopolitics | |
650 | 4 | |a Commercial Law | |
650 | 4 | |a Transport / Logistics | |
650 | 4 | |a Court case | |
700 | 1 | |a Łoskot-Strachota, Agata |e Sonstige |0 (DE-588)1163542393 |4 oth | |
700 | 1 | |a Kardaś, Szymon |e Sonstige |0 (DE-588)1139134779 |4 oth | |
700 | 1 | |a Matuszak, Sławomir |e Sonstige |0 (DE-588)1173829563 |4 oth | |
700 | 1 | |a Tappenden, Jon |e Sonstige |4 oth | |
710 | 2 | |a Central and Eastern European Online Library |e Sonstige |4 oth | |
912 | |a ZDB-45-CGR | ||
940 | 1 | |n oe | |
940 | 1 | |q BSB_OE_CEEOL | |
999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-034791866 | ||
966 | e | |u https://www.ceeol.com/search/gray-literature-detail?id=834801 |l BSB01 |p ZDB-45-CGR |x Verlag |3 Volltext |
Datensatz im Suchindex
_version_ | 1804186202910228480 |
---|---|
adam_txt | |
any_adam_object | |
any_adam_object_boolean | |
author_GND | (DE-588)1163542393 (DE-588)1139134779 (DE-588)1173829563 |
building | Verbundindex |
bvnumber | BV049445972 |
collection | ZDB-45-CGR |
ctrlnum | (ZDB-45-CGR)ceeol834801 (OCoLC)1414553962 (DE-599)BVBBV049445972 |
format | Electronic eBook |
fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>04003nmm a2200505zc 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV049445972</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240315 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr|uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">231204s2019 |||| o||u| ||||||eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ZDB-45-CGR)ceeol834801</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)1414553962</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV049445972</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">aacr</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">OST</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Warszawa [Poland]</subfield><subfield code="b">Ośrodek Studiów Wschodnich im. Marka Karpia</subfield><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Frankfurt M.</subfield><subfield code="b">CEEOL</subfield><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1 Online-Ressource (8 Seiten)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">On 10 September, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) annulled a decision issued by the European Commission on 28 October 2016 allowing the Russian Gazprom to send greater volumes of gas through the OPAL pipeline. The CJEU judgment was issued following a complaint submitted on 16 December 2016 by Poland, supported by Lithuania and Latvia, against the Commission's decision, which on the other hand was formally supported by Germany. The CJEU found in favour of Poland and overturned the Commission's decision, saying that it had been issued in breach of the principle of energy solidarity provided for in art. 194 of the TFEU. The judgment means that the OPAL capacity available to Gazprom has now been reduced, effective immediately, by 12.8 bcm per year, as has transmission via Nord Stream and Germany, as a result. </subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The judgment will probably remain in force, and this is a good outcome for Poland and all parties/sides interested in Gazprom's domineering position on the European gas market being reduced, and opposed to new Russian export pipelines such as Nord Stream 2 being built. The decision will hurt Germany above all, which benefits from the increasing volume of gas being sent through the country, but will also hurt the Czech Republic and other actors that buy gas via Nord Stream. At the same time, the decision exacerbates the already existing divisions between member states. The CJEU's judgment is evidently a blow to Gazprom and Russia, limiting Russia's export capacity at an already difficult time (talks to negotiate a gas deal with Ukraine, and winter approaching). If it remains in force, it will mean that in the next few years, Gazprom cannot afford to stop transit through Ukraine, which is one of the main objectives of Russia's energy policy. </subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The ruling might also have negative consequences for Nord Stream 2, as there is less chance of the project being granted EU law exemptions. This also raises the question of if and how the principle of energy solidarity, reinforced by the CJEU ruling, can be applied to the project. For the duration, the ruling will strengthen Ukraine's position, and that of the EU as well, in talks with Russia about transit through Ukraine in the future and the forthcoming trilateral negotiations. At the same time, it could trigger some sort of retaliation on the part of Russia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Economic policy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Environmental and Energy policy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">International relations/trade</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">EU-Legislation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Geopolitics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Commercial Law</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Transport / Logistics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Court case</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Łoskot-Strachota, Agata</subfield><subfield code="e">Sonstige</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1163542393</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kardaś, Szymon</subfield><subfield code="e">Sonstige</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1139134779</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Matuszak, Sławomir</subfield><subfield code="e">Sonstige</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1173829563</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tappenden, Jon</subfield><subfield code="e">Sonstige</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="710" ind1="2" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Central and Eastern European Online Library</subfield><subfield code="e">Sonstige</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-45-CGR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="q">BSB_OE_CEEOL</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-034791866</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://www.ceeol.com/search/gray-literature-detail?id=834801</subfield><subfield code="l">BSB01</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-45-CGR</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
id | DE-604.BV049445972 |
illustrated | Not Illustrated |
index_date | 2024-07-03T23:12:48Z |
indexdate | 2024-07-10T10:07:23Z |
institution | BVB |
language | English |
oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-034791866 |
oclc_num | 1414553962 |
open_access_boolean | |
owner | DE-12 |
owner_facet | DE-12 |
physical | 1 Online-Ressource (8 Seiten) |
psigel | ZDB-45-CGR BSB_OE_CEEOL |
publishDate | 2019 |
publishDateSearch | 2019 |
publishDateSort | 2019 |
publisher | Ośrodek Studiów Wschodnich im. Marka Karpia |
record_format | marc |
spelling | Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline Warszawa [Poland] Ośrodek Studiów Wschodnich im. Marka Karpia 2019 Frankfurt M. CEEOL 2019 1 Online-Ressource (8 Seiten) txt rdacontent c rdamedia cr rdacarrier On 10 September, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) annulled a decision issued by the European Commission on 28 October 2016 allowing the Russian Gazprom to send greater volumes of gas through the OPAL pipeline. The CJEU judgment was issued following a complaint submitted on 16 December 2016 by Poland, supported by Lithuania and Latvia, against the Commission's decision, which on the other hand was formally supported by Germany. The CJEU found in favour of Poland and overturned the Commission's decision, saying that it had been issued in breach of the principle of energy solidarity provided for in art. 194 of the TFEU. The judgment means that the OPAL capacity available to Gazprom has now been reduced, effective immediately, by 12.8 bcm per year, as has transmission via Nord Stream and Germany, as a result. The judgment will probably remain in force, and this is a good outcome for Poland and all parties/sides interested in Gazprom's domineering position on the European gas market being reduced, and opposed to new Russian export pipelines such as Nord Stream 2 being built. The decision will hurt Germany above all, which benefits from the increasing volume of gas being sent through the country, but will also hurt the Czech Republic and other actors that buy gas via Nord Stream. At the same time, the decision exacerbates the already existing divisions between member states. The CJEU's judgment is evidently a blow to Gazprom and Russia, limiting Russia's export capacity at an already difficult time (talks to negotiate a gas deal with Ukraine, and winter approaching). If it remains in force, it will mean that in the next few years, Gazprom cannot afford to stop transit through Ukraine, which is one of the main objectives of Russia's energy policy. The ruling might also have negative consequences for Nord Stream 2, as there is less chance of the project being granted EU law exemptions. This also raises the question of if and how the principle of energy solidarity, reinforced by the CJEU ruling, can be applied to the project. For the duration, the ruling will strengthen Ukraine's position, and that of the EU as well, in talks with Russia about transit through Ukraine in the future and the forthcoming trilateral negotiations. At the same time, it could trigger some sort of retaliation on the part of Russia Economic policy Environmental and Energy policy International relations/trade EU-Legislation Geopolitics Commercial Law Transport / Logistics Court case Łoskot-Strachota, Agata Sonstige (DE-588)1163542393 oth Kardaś, Szymon Sonstige (DE-588)1139134779 oth Matuszak, Sławomir Sonstige (DE-588)1173829563 oth Tappenden, Jon Sonstige oth Central and Eastern European Online Library Sonstige oth |
spellingShingle | Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline Economic policy Environmental and Energy policy International relations/trade EU-Legislation Geopolitics Commercial Law Transport / Logistics Court case |
title | Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline |
title_auth | Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline |
title_exact_search | Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline |
title_exact_search_txtP | Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline |
title_full | Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline |
title_fullStr | Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline |
title_full_unstemmed | Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline |
title_short | Gazprom's interests hit by CJEU judgment on OPAL pipeline |
title_sort | gazprom s interests hit by cjeu judgment on opal pipeline |
topic | Economic policy Environmental and Energy policy International relations/trade EU-Legislation Geopolitics Commercial Law Transport / Logistics Court case |
topic_facet | Economic policy Environmental and Energy policy International relations/trade EU-Legislation Geopolitics Commercial Law Transport / Logistics Court case |
work_keys_str_mv | AT łoskotstrachotaagata gazpromsinterestshitbycjeujudgmentonopalpipeline AT kardasszymon gazpromsinterestshitbycjeujudgmentonopalpipeline AT matuszaksławomir gazpromsinterestshitbycjeujudgmentonopalpipeline AT tappendenjon gazpromsinterestshitbycjeujudgmentonopalpipeline AT centralandeasterneuropeanonlinelibrary gazpromsinterestshitbycjeujudgmentonopalpipeline |