Both bishops and local councils issue condemnations which are not necessarily confirmed by ecumenical ones, but as long as not invalidated by a such, or by a Pope, remain binding on area and may be authoritative outside it.
Examples, bishop Tempier condemned on laetare Sunday of early 1277 / "late 1276" as they would have said, a number of authors and at least one book whose author was free to write other ones (Andrew the Chaplain was not necessarily a bad theologian because his love lore was bad for morals), and also 219 theses.
48 years later Stephen III of Paris revoked, not the condemnations of Stephen II, but any irregularity or condemnation which the theses of St Thomas possibly could have incurred due to it.
Or the Councils of Toledo, of which the FIRST (finished in 400 AD) had filioque in an authoritative creed (not the Nicene one!) after which certain condemnations were added.
It is possible that in Spain the "uncreated energies" of Palamas would be falling under those condemnations of the bishops assembled in Toledo.
So, yes, ecumenical councils are NOT the only occasions when bishops decide with authority binding on their own subjects, what these are not allowed to believe.