Infinis Plc Infinis (Re-Gen) Ltd, R (on the application of) v Gas & Electricity Markets Authority & Anor Pays/Territoire Royaume-Uni Type de cour Nationale - cour supérieure Date Aoû 10, 2011 Source UNEP, InforMEA Nom du tribunal High Court Siège de la cour London Juge Lindblom Numéro de référence [2011] EWHC 1873 Langue Anglais Sujet Énergie, Questions juridiques Mot clé Énergie renouvelable Conservation de l'énergie/production de l'énergie Échange de droits d'émission Responsabilité/indemnisation Résumé Infinis, the claimants, owned and operated two power stations supplying electricity to the National Grid. As electricity suppliers, they were required to enter into arrangements to generate electricity from non-fossil fuel sources. These arrangements allowed suppliers to obtain Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs), or, if their targets were not met, they would have to pay a charge. The Authority had held that the claimants power stations could not be accredited because, in its view, there was an existing Non-Fossil Fuel Order (NFFO) arrangement in place with the relevant power stations. Under the terms of the Renewable Obligations Order 2006 and Renewable Obligations Order 2009, this arrangement excluded them from accreditation and ROCs could therefore not be issued. Infinis applied for judicial review of the Gas & Electricity Markets Authoritys decision to refuse to accredit the two power stations, which had left them liable for certain charges. Infinis argued that the Authority had erred because the Replacement Power Purchase Agreement (RPPA) (which amounted to an NFFO) was no longer in force and of effect at the relevant time. The court agreed with Infinis that the Gas and Electricity Markets Authoritys decision not to accredit Infinis generating stations was unlawful. It followed that Infinis was denied a pecuniary benefit that it was entitled to by statute. The court set a rare precedent in not only finding that this constituted a breach of Article 1 of the first Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights, but also that damages should be awarded due to the breach. The damages awarded were significant and amounted to over £3 million. Texte intégral COU-159575.pdf