Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 14 September 2023 – ‘Toplofikatsia Sofia’ EAD v M. K. T., Ts. B. T., А. K. V.

(Case C-569/23, Toplofikatsia Sofia)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski rayonen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: ‘Toplofikatsia Sofia’ EAD

Defendants: M. K. T., Ts. B. T., А. K. V.

Questions referred

1.    Does Article 101(1) TFEU preclude national legislation, such as that applicable in the present case, under which a lawyer is obliged, on pain of disciplinary measures, to agree a fee that is not lower than the minimum amount provided for in the regulation, as regards each of the actions brought, irrespective of the form in which they are joined, and, if the client is not willing to pay such a fee in the light of the amount of the minimum fee in relation to the amount claimed or on grounds of financial difficulty, the only lawful possibility for the lawyer to conclude a contract with the client is to provide free legal assistance, in which case the court must determine and award to the lawyer a fee in respect of each action brought that may not be lower than the minimum amount laid down by the Vissh advokatski savet (Supreme Bar Council, Bulgaria), without it being possible to reduce that amount if the fee due is manifestly excessive?

2.    Does Article 101(1) TFEU preclude national legislation, such as that applicable in the present case, under which, in the case of minimum lawyers’ fees laid down in a regulation by way of a decision of an association of undertakings, the Supreme Bar Council, which is mandatory for and binding on all lawyers, a lawyer may provide free legal assistance to a client whom he or she considers to be a person in financial difficulty, and the court is obliged, without being able to verify this, to award the lawyer a fee equal to the minimum amount laid down in the decision of the association of undertakings?

____________