# C_2020077EN.01000502.xml

| 9.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 January 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven — Netherlands) — Ursa Major Services BV v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit

(Case C-814/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common fisheries policy - Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 - Article 55(1) - Financial contribution by the European Fisheries Fund (EFF) - Eligibility of expenditure - Condition - Expenditure actually paid by the beneficiaries - Meaning)

(2020/C 77/07)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ursa Major Services BV

Defendant: Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 55(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 of 27 July 2006 on the European Fisheries Fund must be interpreted as being applicable to the relationship between the managing authority of an operational programme and the beneficiary of a subsidy granted under the European Fisheries Fund, so that that provision can be invoked against that beneficiary; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 55(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 of 27 July 2006 on the European Fisheries Fund must be interpreted as being applicable to the relationship between the managing authority of an operational programme and the beneficiary of a subsidy granted under the European Fisheries Fund, so that that provision can be invoked against that beneficiary;

| 2. | Article 55(1) of Regulation No 1198/2006 must be interpreted as meaning that an amount invoiced to the beneficiary of a subsidy granted under the European Fisheries Fund and paid by him may be regarded as expenditure actually paid, as referred to in that provision, even if the third party who invoiced that amount has also made a financial contribution to the subsidised project, either by a set-off of the debt owed to him by the beneficiary against that beneficiary’s claim against him, stemming from his commitment to make a contribution, or by issuing a separate invoice, provided that the expenditure and the contribution concerned are duly supported by receipted invoices or accounting documents of equivalent probative value, which it is for the referring court to ascertain. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 55(1) of Regulation No 1198/2006 must be interpreted as meaning that an amount invoiced to the beneficiary of a subsidy granted under the European Fisheries Fund and paid by him may be regarded as expenditure actually paid, as referred to in that provision, even if the third party who invoiced that amount has also made a financial contribution to the subsidised project, either by a set-off of the debt owed to him by the beneficiary against that beneficiary’s claim against him, stemming from his commitment to make a contribution, or by issuing a separate invoice, provided that the expenditure and the contribution concerned are duly supported by receipted invoices or accounting documents of equivalent probative value, which it is for the referring court to ascertain.

---

(1)  OJ C 122, 1.4.2019.

---