# C_2012089EN.01001002.xml

| 24.3.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 89/10 |
| --------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | ------- |

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 29 December 2011 — Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer), successor in law to the Office national interprofessionnel des fruits, des légumes, des vins et de l’horticulture (VINIFLHOR) v Coopérative des producteurs d’asperges de Montcalm (COPAM)

(Case C-676/11)

2012/C 89/15

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer), successor in law to the Office national interprofessionnel des fruits, des légumes, des vins et de l’horticulture (VINIFLHOR)

Defendant: Coopérative des producteurs d’asperges de Montcalm (COPAM)

Questions referred

| 1. | How is the option, granted by Article 2(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4045/89 of 21 December 1989 on scrutiny by Member States of transactions forming part of the system of financing by the Guarantee Section of the EAGGF,( 1 ) to extend the scrutiny period ‘for periods ... preceding or following the 12-month period’ which it defines, to be implemented by a Member State, having regard to, first, the need to protect the Communities’ financial interests, and second, the principle of legal certainty and the necessity to not give the scrutiny authorities indefinite power? |
| -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |

| 2. | In particular:
—
Must the period scrutinised, in all instances — if the scrutiny is not to be marred by an irregularity which the person scrutinised may rely on against the decision giving due effect to the results of the scrutiny — end during the twelve month period which precedes the ‘scrutiny’ period during which the scrutiny operations are carried out? —
In the event of a positive reply to the preceding question, how must the option, expressly provided for by the regulation, to extend the period of scrutiny for periods ‘following the 12-month period’ be understood? —
In the event of a negative reply to the first question, must the scrutiny period nevertheless — if the scrutiny is not to be marred by an irregularity which the scrutinised person may rely on against the decision giving due effect to the results of the scrutiny — include a twelve month period which ends during the scrutiny period preceding that during which the scrutiny was carried out, or, on the contrary, may the scrutiny cover only a period which ends before the beginning of the preceding scrutiny period? | — | Must the period scrutinised, in all instances — if the scrutiny is not to be marred by an irregularity which the person scrutinised may rely on against the decision giving due effect to the results of the scrutiny — end during the twelve month period which precedes the ‘scrutiny’ period during which the scrutiny operations are carried out? | — | In the event of a positive reply to the preceding question, how must the option, expressly provided for by the regulation, to extend the period of scrutiny for periods ‘following the 12-month period’ be understood? | — | In the event of a negative reply to the first question, must the scrutiny period nevertheless — if the scrutiny is not to be marred by an irregularity which the scrutinised person may rely on against the decision giving due effect to the results of the scrutiny — include a twelve month period which ends during the scrutiny period preceding that during which the scrutiny was carried out, or, on the contrary, may the scrutiny cover only a period which ends before the beginning of the preceding scrutiny period? |
| -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| — | Must the period scrutinised, in all instances — if the scrutiny is not to be marred by an irregularity which the person scrutinised may rely on against the decision giving due effect to the results of the scrutiny — end during the twelve month period which precedes the ‘scrutiny’ period during which the scrutiny operations are carried out? | | | | | | |
| — | In the event of a positive reply to the preceding question, how must the option, expressly provided for by the regulation, to extend the period of scrutiny for periods ‘following the 12-month period’ be understood? | | | | | | |
| — | In the event of a negative reply to the first question, must the scrutiny period nevertheless — if the scrutiny is not to be marred by an irregularity which the scrutinised person may rely on against the decision giving due effect to the results of the scrutiny — include a twelve month period which ends during the scrutiny period preceding that during which the scrutiny was carried out, or, on the contrary, may the scrutiny cover only a period which ends before the beginning of the preceding scrutiny period? | | | | | | |

---

( 1 )  Council Regulation (EEC) No 4045/89 of 21 December 1989 on scrutiny by Member States of transactions forming part of the system of financing by the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund and repealing Directive 77/435/EEC (OJ 1989 L 388, p. 18).

---