# C_2018455EN.01002301.xml

| 17.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 455/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 455/23

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal de Coimbra (Portugal) lodged on 5 October 2018 — Nelson Antunes da Cunha, Lda v Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas IP (IFAP)

(Case C-627/18)

(2018/C 455/33)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal de Coimbra

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Nelson Antunes da Cunha, Lda

Defendant: Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas IP (IFAP)

Questions referred

| 1. | Does the limitation period for the exercise of the powers to recover aid, provided for in Article 17(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 (1) of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, apply only to relations between the European Union and the Member State to which the decision to recover aid is addressed, or does it apply also to relations between that Member State and the opponent, as the beneficiary of the aid considered incompatible with the Single Market? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the limitation period for the exercise of the powers to recover aid, provided for in Article 17(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 (1) of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, apply only to relations between the European Union and the Member State to which the decision to recover aid is addressed, or does it apply also to relations between that Member State and the opponent, as the beneficiary of the aid considered incompatible with the Single Market?

| 2. | Should it be found that that limitation period is applicable to relations between the Member State to which the decision to recover aid is addressed and the beneficiary of the aid considered incompatible with the Single Market, must it be understood that that period is applicable only at the procedural stage, or also to the enforcement of the recovery decision? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Should it be found that that limitation period is applicable to relations between the Member State to which the decision to recover aid is addressed and the beneficiary of the aid considered incompatible with the Single Market, must it be understood that that period is applicable only at the procedural stage, or also to the enforcement of the recovery decision?

| 3. | Should it be found that that limitation period is applicable to relations between the Member State to which the decision to recover aid and the beneficiary of the aid considered incompatible with the Single Market, must it be understood that that period may be interrupted by any measure concerning illegal aid adopted by the Commission or by the Member State, even where such measures have not been notified to the beneficiary of the aid to be recovered? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Should it be found that that limitation period is applicable to relations between the Member State to which the decision to recover aid and the beneficiary of the aid considered incompatible with the Single Market, must it be understood that that period may be interrupted by any measure concerning illegal aid adopted by the Commission or by the Member State, even where such measures have not been notified to the beneficiary of the aid to be recovered?

| 4. | Does Article 16(2) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015, together with the principles of EU law, namely the principles of effectiveness and of the incompatibility of State aid with the Single Market, preclude the application of a limitation period of a lesser duration than that laid down in Article 17 of the regulation, such as that provided for in Article 310(1)(d) of the Civil Code, to the interest accruing on the aid to be recovered? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Does Article 16(2) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015, together with the principles of EU law, namely the principles of effectiveness and of the incompatibility of State aid with the Single Market, preclude the application of a limitation period of a lesser duration than that laid down in Article 17 of the regulation, such as that provided for in Article 310(1)(d) of the Civil Code, to the interest accruing on the aid to be recovered?

---

(1)  OJ 2015 L 248, p. 9.

---