# C_2007042EN.01000701.xml

| 24.2.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 42/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 42/7

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 11 January 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands)) — Vonk Dairy Products BV v Productschap Zuivel

(Case C-279/05) (1)

1

(Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Cheese - Articles 16 to 18 of Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 - Differentiated export refunds - Almost immediate re-exportation from the country of importation - Evidence of abuse - Recovery of payments wrongly made - Second subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 - Continuous or repeated irregularity)

(2007/C 42/11)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Vonk Dairy Products BV

Applicant:

Defendant: Productschap Zuivel

Defendant:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven Interpretation of Articles 16 to 18 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products (OJ 1987 L 351, p. 1) in the version in force at the material time — Interpretation of the second subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests (OJ 1995 L 312, p. 1) — Differentiated refunds not due in the case of re-exports by the exporter that constitute an abuse — Determination of the criteria for a finding to that effect — Continuous or repeated irregularity

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | In proceedings for the withdrawal and recovery of differentiated export refunds which have been definitively paid on the basis of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products, a finding that those refunds have been wrongly paid must be substantiated by evidence of abuse on the part of the exporter, furnished in accordance with the rules of national law. |
| --- | --- |

1.

In proceedings for the withdrawal and recovery of differentiated export refunds which have been definitively paid on the basis of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products, a finding that those refunds have been wrongly paid must be substantiated by evidence of abuse on the part of the exporter, furnished in accordance with the rules of national law.

| 2. | For the purposes of the second subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests, an irregularity is continuous or repeated where it committed by a Community operator who derives economic advantages from a body of similar transactions which infringe the same provision of Community law. The fact that the irregularity relates to a relatively small proportion of all the transactions carried out in a given period and that the transactions in which the irregularity has been detected always concern different consignments is immaterial in this respect. |
| --- | --- |

2.

For the purposes of the second subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests, an irregularity is continuous or repeated where it committed by a Community operator who derives economic advantages from a body of similar transactions which infringe the same provision of Community law. The fact that the irregularity relates to a relatively small proportion of all the transactions carried out in a given period and that the transactions in which the irregularity has been detected always concern different consignments is immaterial in this respect.

---

(1)  OJ C 257, 15.10.2005.

1

---