# C_2015245EN.01000201.xml

| 27.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 245/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 245/2

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije (Slovenia) lodged on 4 March 2015 — Občina Gorje v Republic of Slovenia

(Case C-111/15)

(2015/C 245/02)

Language of the case: Slovenian

Referring court

Referring court

Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Občina Gorje

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Slovenia

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Regulation No 1698/2005[/EC] (1), in particular Article 71(3) thereof, pursuant to which the rules on eligibility of expenditure are to be set at national level, subject to the special conditions laid down by that regulation for certain rural development measures, be interpreted as precluding the national legislation set out in Article 79(4) of [the Decree on measures implementing Axes 1, 3 and 4 of the Rural Development Programme of the Republic of Slovenia for the period 2007-2013, in the years 2010 to 2013 (‘the RDP Decree’)] and in point 3 of Section VI of the invitation to tender, pursuant to which only expenses incurred after the date of adoption of the decision on the right to obtain funding (until the end of the investment period or, at the latest, 30 June 2015) constitute eligible investment expenditure? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Regulation No 1698/2005[/EC] (1), in particular Article 71(3) thereof, pursuant to which the rules on eligibility of expenditure are to be set at national level, subject to the special conditions laid down by that regulation for certain rural development measures, be interpreted as precluding the national legislation set out in Article 79(4) of [the Decree on measures implementing Axes 1, 3 and 4 of the Rural Development Programme of the Republic of Slovenia for the period 2007-2013, in the years 2010 to 2013 (‘the RDP Decree’)] and in point 3 of Section VI of the invitation to tender, pursuant to which only expenses incurred after the date of adoption of the decision on the right to obtain funding (until the end of the investment period or, at the latest, 30 June 2015) constitute eligible investment expenditure?

1

| 2. | If the answer to the first question is in the negative, must Regulation No 1698/2005, in particular Article 71(3) thereof, be interpreted as precluding the national legislation set out in Article 56(4) of the Zakon o kmetijstvu (Law on agriculture), in accordance with which any claim that does not meet the requirements of Article 79(4) of the RDP Decree on eligible investment expenditure incurred after the date of adoption of the decision [on the right to obtain funding] must be rejected in its entirety? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question is in the negative, must Regulation No 1698/2005, in particular Article 71(3) thereof, be interpreted as precluding the national legislation set out in Article 56(4) of the Zakon o kmetijstvu (Law on agriculture), in accordance with which any claim that does not meet the requirements of Article 79(4) of the RDP Decree on eligible investment expenditure incurred after the date of adoption of the decision [on the right to obtain funding] must be rejected in its entirety?

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), OJ 2005 L 277, p. 1.

1

---