# C_2012032EN.01001402.xml

| 4.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/14

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal do Porto (Portugal) lodged on 22 November 2011 — Grande Área Metropolitana do Porto (GAMP) v Ministério da Agricultura, do Mar, do Ambiente e do Ordenamento do Território and Others

(Case C-579/11)

2012/C 32/26

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal do Porto

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Grande Área Metropolitana do Porto (GAMP)

Applicant:

Defendants: Ministério da Agricultura, do Mar, do Ambiente e do Ordenamento do Território, Comissão Directiva do Programa Operacional Potencial Humano, Ministério do Trabalho e da Solidariedade Social

Defendants:

Other parties: Sindicato dos Quadros Técnicos do Estado, Ministério da Saúde, Instituto do Desporto de Portugal (IP)

Other parties

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Community law and, in particular, the provisions of Articles 5 to 8, 22, 32, 34, 35 and 56 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (1) of 11 July 2006 and Articles 174, 175 and 176 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, be interpreted as meaning that it does not allow exceptions to the principle of territorial eligibility of expenditure, that is, that expenditure relating to operations co-financed by the Structural Funds and by the Cohesion Fund is eligible under the Operational Programmes only if it is effected in the NUTS II regions covered by each of those Operational Programmes? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Community law and, in particular, the provisions of Articles 5 to 8, 22, 32, 34, 35 and 56 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (1) of 11 July 2006 and Articles 174, 175 and 176 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, be interpreted as meaning that it does not allow exceptions to the principle of territorial eligibility of expenditure, that is, that expenditure relating to operations co-financed by the Structural Funds and by the Cohesion Fund is eligible under the Operational Programmes only if it is effected in the NUTS II regions covered by each of those Operational Programmes?

1

| 2. | Specifically, must the abovementioned instruments be interpreted as meaning that they do not allow national authorities to establish rules that, by constituting exceptions to the principle of territoriality of expenditure, allow investments to be considered eligible under Operational Programmes specifically aimed at the Convergence Objective if the location of those investments, or of the beneficiary body, is not situated in the NUTS II regions covered by such Operational Programmes? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Specifically, must the abovementioned instruments be interpreted as meaning that they do not allow national authorities to establish rules that, by constituting exceptions to the principle of territoriality of expenditure, allow investments to be considered eligible under Operational Programmes specifically aimed at the Convergence Objective if the location of those investments, or of the beneficiary body, is not situated in the NUTS II regions covered by such Operational Programmes?

| 3. | Or, on the contrary, must Community law and, in particular, the provisions in Articles 5 to 8, 22, 32, 34, 35 and 56 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 and Articles 174, 175 and 176 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude the existence of exceptions to the principle of territorial eligibility of expenditure, allowing national authorities to establish rules that allow the expenditure relating to operations co-financed by the Structural Funds and by the Cohesion Fund to be considered as eligible under the Operational Programmes, even though it is not effected in the NUTS II regions covered by each of those Operational Programmes, particularly when those exceptions relate to expenditure/operations with a relevant spill-over effect, that is, justified according to the nature of the operations and the multiplying effect that they give rise to in regions other than those in which the investment is made? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Or, on the contrary, must Community law and, in particular, the provisions in Articles 5 to 8, 22, 32, 34, 35 and 56 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 and Articles 174, 175 and 176 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude the existence of exceptions to the principle of territorial eligibility of expenditure, allowing national authorities to establish rules that allow the expenditure relating to operations co-financed by the Structural Funds and by the Cohesion Fund to be considered as eligible under the Operational Programmes, even though it is not effected in the NUTS II regions covered by each of those Operational Programmes, particularly when those exceptions relate to expenditure/operations with a relevant spill-over effect, that is, justified according to the nature of the operations and the multiplying effect that they give rise to in regions other than those in which the investment is made?

| 4. | More specifically, do those instruments preclude national authorities from establishing rules that allow investments to be considered eligible in the context of Operational Programmes aimed at the Convergence Objective where those investments, or the beneficiary body, are not located in the NUTS II regions covered by that Convergence Objective, particularly where they relate to expenditure/operations with a relevant spill-over effect, that is, justified according to the nature of the operations and the multiplying effect that they give rise to in regions other than those in which the investment is made? |
| --- | --- |

4.

More specifically, do those instruments preclude national authorities from establishing rules that allow investments to be considered eligible in the context of Operational Programmes aimed at the Convergence Objective where those investments, or the beneficiary body, are not located in the NUTS II regions covered by that Convergence Objective, particularly where they relate to expenditure/operations with a relevant spill-over effect, that is, justified according to the nature of the operations and the multiplying effect that they give rise to in regions other than those in which the investment is made?

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (OJ 2006 L 210, p. 25).

1

---