The Supreme endorses cutting premiums for renewable Sebastian

Question

The third room of the Supreme Court has endorsed several ministerial orders that develop cutting 740 million per year applied during 2011, 2012 and 2013 at the PV premiums approved by the former Minister of Industry, Miguel Sebastián. The cuts were included under the Royal Decree Law 14/2010 which reduced annual hours eligible for premium facilities because, as he understood the High Court, the producers had no right to such aid unchangeable and prioritized the need for tackle the tariff deficit.

In a judgment of 13 January, the Supreme believes that the cut will not infringe or violate the Community directives constitutional principles of legal certainty, legitimate expectations and no confiscation. Nor violate the prohibition of arbitrariness of the authorities.

The Court recognizes that cutting hours eligible for premium " results in the decrease of the expected benefits initially calculated " but believes that "no otherwise reveals the principles of legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations." To do this, asserting that in view of the "economic context in which it takes " and " evolution of the energy sector, conditioned by the increase of the tariff deficit, threatened the financial sustainability of the electricity system."

A judgment of the Supreme, the owners of photovoltaic systems "have no right to unchangeable economic regime governing the perception of their salaries remain unchanged ", especially in view that " they themselves have chosen not to go to market (possibility always remains open to them), but the advantage of a public system of fixing " rates.

European law In last week's ruling, the Supreme does not understand that reducing hours eligible for premium " defraud or prejudice " the law of the European Union. "It can not be considered" this measure " denature substantially the special regime " that photovoltaics is welcomed, even more so when it is adopted in the name of " sustainability of the electricity system itself," which is what " justifies introduction of such time constraints, " he says.

The cut to the PV was far greater envergardura within the royal decree law at stake. This standard was developed to eliminate the tariff deficit and led to the rejection of not only domestic producers but also foreigners, who have contested the norm before international arbitration tribunals.

The Supreme respond to appeals by 14 companies of Photovoltaic against half a dozen ministerial orders development of Royal Decree 1565/2010 and Royal Decree Law 14/2010, the contents of the latter, having range law, they can not directly use the companies.