Language of document :

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Grondwettelijk Hof (Belgium) lodged on 2 January 2014 – KPN Group Belgium NV and Mobistar NV v Ministerraad Intervener: Belgacom NV

(Case C-1/14)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Grondwettelijk Hof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: KPN Group Belgium NV and Mobistar NV

Defendant: Ministerraad

Intervener: Belgacom NV

Questions referred

Should Directive 2002/22/EC 1 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive), and in particular Articles 9 and 32 thereof, be interpreted as meaning that the social tariff for universal service as well as the compensation mechanism provided for in Article 13(1)(b) of the Universal Service Directive are not only applicable to electronic communications by means of a telephone connection at a fixed location to a public communications network but also to electronic communications by means of mobile communication services and/or internet subscriptions?

Should Article 9(3) of the Universal Service Directive be interpreted as allowing Member States to add special tariff options to the universal service for services other than those defined in Article 9(2) of the universal service?

If the answers to the first and second questions are in the negative, are the relevant provisions of the Universal Service Directive compatible with the principle of equality, as set out inter alia in Article 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union? 2

____________

1 OJ 2002 L 108, p. 51.

2 OJ 2000 L 364, p. 1.