59Contrary to what the appellants in the main proceedings argue in their written observations, that interpretation is also consistent with the principle of legal certainty which, according to the case-law, precludes a new legal rule from applying retroactively, namely to a situation established prior to its entry into force, and which requires that any factual situation should normally, in the absence of any express contrary provision, be examined in the light of the legal rules existing at the time when the situation obtained (see, to that effect, judgment of 25 January 2022, VYSOČINA WIND (C‑181/20, EU:C:2022:51, paragraph 47 and the case-law cited). Furthermore, as the Advocate General observes in point 77 of his Opinion, that interpretation corresponds to that of ESMA, which, under Article 13(2) of Directive 2011/61, ensures the existence of guidelines on sound remuneration policies which comply with Annex II to that directive and which expressly stated, in the information made available to the public by that authority, referred to in paragraph 28 of the present judgment, that the rules of that directive on remuneration and the related guidelines apply to AIFMs from the date of their authorisation.