# C_2022119EN.01001101.xml

| 14.3.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 119/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.3.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 119/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 27 January 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) — Latvia) — ‘Sātiņi-S’ SIA

(Case C-238/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 17 - Right to property - Directive 2009/147/EC - Compensation for the damage caused to aquaculture by protected wild birds in a Natura 2000 area - Compensation less than the damage actually suffered - Article 107(1) TFEU - State aid - Concept of ‘advantage’ - Conditions - Regulation (EU) No 717/2014 - De minimis rule)

(2022/C 119/14)

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa (Senāts)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant:‘Sātiņi-S’ SIA

Intervening party: Dabas aizsardzības pārvalde

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as not precluding the compensation granted by a Member State for the losses suffered by an economic operator as a result of the protective measures applicable in a Natura 2000 area under Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds being significantly less than the damage actually incurred by that operator; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as not precluding the compensation granted by a Member State for the losses suffered by an economic operator as a result of the protective measures applicable in a Natura 2000 area under Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds being significantly less than the damage actually incurred by that operator;

| 2. | Article 107(1) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that compensation granted by a Member State for the losses suffered by an economic operator as a result of the protective measures applicable in a Natura 2000 network area under Directive 2009/147 confers an advantage capable of constituting ‘State aid’ for the purposes of that provision, where the other conditions relating to such a classification are satisfied; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 107(1) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that compensation granted by a Member State for the losses suffered by an economic operator as a result of the protective measures applicable in a Natura 2000 network area under Directive 2009/147 confers an advantage capable of constituting ‘State aid’ for the purposes of that provision, where the other conditions relating to such a classification are satisfied;

| 3. | Article 3(2) of Regulation (EU) No 717/2014 of 27 June 2014 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 [TFEU] to de minimis aid in the fishery and aquaculture sector must be interpreted as meaning that, in a case where the compensation such as that described in point 2 of this operative part fulfils the conditions of Article 107(1) TFEU, the de minimis ceiling of EUR 30 000, provided for in that Article 3(2) of Regulation No 717/2014, is applicable to that compensation. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Article 3(2) of Regulation (EU) No 717/2014 of 27 June 2014 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 [TFEU] to de minimis aid in the fishery and aquaculture sector must be interpreted as meaning that, in a case where the compensation such as that described in point 2 of this operative part fulfils the conditions of Article 107(1) TFEU, the de minimis ceiling of EUR 30 000, provided for in that Article 3(2) of Regulation No 717/2014, is applicable to that compensation.

---

(1)  OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.

---