Currently, tasks related to the regulation of fuel and energy management and the promotion of competition are carried out by the President of the Energy Regulatory Office (hereinafter: “President of the ERO”), who is the central government administration body, while appeals against decisions of the President of the ERO are considered by common courts. The current model, appropriate not only for energy cases, but – in a broader sense – also for other separate proceedings concerning competition and consumer protection and other regulated sectors of the economy, is generally referred to as hybrid proceedings. The introduction of the model in question, as well as its functioning, has caused and still causes numerous interpretative and practical doubts. The aim of the article is to present an outline of the issues related to conducting proceedings in energy regulation cases, and then to discuss practical problems related to the enforceability of decisions of the President of the ERO in the event of an appeal to the court of competition and consumer protection. In particular, two different positions were presented, on the one hand, in the doctrine of procedural law, the case law of common courts and those occurring in the practice of the President of the ERO, and on the other hand, in the case law of administrative courts. The third part of the article contains the author’s position on the matter and a concise presentation of the de lege ferenda postulates presented in the national literature.