# C_2022389EN.01000501.xml

| 10.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 389/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 389/5

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Riigikohus (Estonia) lodged on 4 July 2022 — R.M. and E.M. v Eesti Vabariik (Põllumajanduse Registrite ja Informatsiooni Amet)

(Case C-437/22)

(2022/C 389/06)

Language of the case: Estonian

Referring court

Riigikohus

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants on a point of law: R.M. and E.M.

Other party and injured party: Eesti Vabariik (represented by the Põllumajanduse Registrite ja Informatsiooni Amet)

Questions referred

| 1. | In circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, does a basis with a direct legal effect flow from Article 7 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 (1) of 18 December 1995, read in conjunction with Article 56(1) and Article 54(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 and with Article 35(6) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 640/2014 (3) of 11 March 2014, for the recovery of fraudulently obtained aid financed by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) from the representatives of a beneficiary legal person who intentionally made false declarations with a view to fraudulently obtaining the aid? |
| --- | --- |

1.

In circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, does a basis with a direct legal effect flow from Article 7 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 (1) of 18 December 1995, read in conjunction with Article 56(1) and Article 54(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 and with Article 35(6) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 640/2014 (3) of 11 March 2014, for the recovery of fraudulently obtained aid financed by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) from the representatives of a beneficiary legal person who intentionally made false declarations with a view to fraudulently obtaining the aid?

| 2. | In circumstances such as those of the main proceedings, in which aid to be financed by the EAFRD was, as a result of fraud, set and paid to a limited liability company (Osaühing), can the representatives of the beneficiary company who carried out the fraud and who, at the time when the aid was fraudulently obtained, were simultaneously the beneficial owners of that company, also be regarded as beneficiaries within the meaning of Article 54(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 and Article 35(6) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 640/2014 of 11 March 2014? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In circumstances such as those of the main proceedings, in which aid to be financed by the EAFRD was, as a result of fraud, set and paid to a limited liability company (Osaühing), can the representatives of the beneficiary company who carried out the fraud and who, at the time when the aid was fraudulently obtained, were simultaneously the beneficial owners of that company, also be regarded as beneficiaries within the meaning of Article 54(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 and Article 35(6) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 640/2014 of 11 March 2014?

---

(1)  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).

(2)  Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 352/78, (EC) No 165/94, (EC) No 2799/98, (EC) No 814/2000, (EC) No 1290/2005 and (EC) No 485/2008 (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 549).

(3)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 640/2014 of 11 March 2014 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the integrated administration and control system and conditions for refusal or withdrawal of payments and administrative penalties applicable to direct payments, rural development support and cross compliance (OJ 2014 L 181, p. 48).

---