On 12 March 2026, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “CJEU”) handed down a decision in Case C-514/24 Magyar Telekom Nyrt. (“Magyar”) v Nemzeti Média- és Hírközlési Hatóság Elnöke (the Hungarian Communications and Media Authority) (“NMHH”) relating to a preliminary reference made to it by the Hungarian Supreme Court.
The CJEU found that consumers who have entered into Electronic Communication Service (“ECS”) contracts may terminate their contract free-of-charge if the contract is amended to comply with a court decision, where that decision enforces a pre-existing legal obligation.
The case reemphasises the risks of non-compliance for operators, which include not only penalties but triggering of the termination rights afforded to consumers under Article 105(4) of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 – European Electronic Communications Code (the “EECC”).
Background
This case arose from a long-standing dispute concerning zero-rating tariffs. Under such tariff structures, data traffic associated with certain applications—such as certain named music streaming or social media platforms—is excluded from a customer’s monthly data allowance.
In earlier judgments delivered in 2020 and 2021, the CJEU held that these practices infringe the principle of net neutrality, as set out under Article 3(3) of Regulation 2015/2120, and are incompatible with EU law. Following those rulings, national regulatory authorities, including the NMHH, required ECS providers to amend existing contracts to ensure compliance.
Against this background, the case addresses whether consumers enjoy a specific right to terminate their contracts without incurring any additional charges, as per Article 105(4) EECC, where ECS providers are required to unilaterally modify contractual terms in order to comply with law as articulated in a court ruling. Magyar argued that customers would not be entitled to free termination as the contract modifications were directly required by EU law or at least by the administrative decisions based on that EU law. Article 105(4) EECC provides that if a contract is modified unilaterally as a consequence of a change “directly prescribed by Union law or national law”, consumers’ exit rights would not be triggered in so far as they could terminate the contract without incurring additional costs.
The CJEU clarified that such contract modifications did not fall within the “change of law” exception under Article 105(4) EECC that would otherwise prevent termination without charge. This is due to the fact that such a ruling from a court is merely an interpretation of the law as opposed to a change of law.
The CJEU also clarified that contract modifications made on foot of the guidelines of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (“BEREC”) did not fall within the Article 105(4) EECC exception to consumers’ termination rights. BEREC guidelines are considered as interpretative instruments designed to guide regulators and they do not constitute binding EU law.
As a result, ECS providers in circumstances such as these are obliged to allow consumers to terminate their contracts without incurring additional charges once the contract modifications were unilaterally made. This obligation applies even where the provider introduces the changes in response to requirements or pressure from national regulatory authorities.
Significance
This ruling strengthens consumer protections in ECS contracts and highlights the risks for operators where their contracts are non-compliant with telecoms regulatory laws.
For further information on the above a member of the Competition and Regulation group or your usual Matheson contact