# C_2010063EN.01002802.xml

| 13.3.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/28

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije (Republic of Slovenia) lodged on 21 December 2009 — Marija Omejc v Republika Slovenije

(Case C-536/09)

2010/C 63/47

Language of the case: Slovene

Referring court

Referring court

Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Marija Omejc

Applicant:

Defendant: Republika Slovenije

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Must the expression ‘prevents an on-the-spot check [from being carried out]’ be interpreted in accordance with national law, which links the concept of prevention to deliberate conduct or negligence on the part of a particular person? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must the expression ‘prevents an on-the-spot check [from being carried out]’ be interpreted in accordance with national law, which links the concept of prevention to deliberate conduct or negligence on the part of a particular person?

| 2. | If the first question is answered in the negative: must the expression ‘prevents an on-the-spot check [from being carried out]’ be interpreted as including, as well as deliberate acts or situations deliberately brought about that make it impossible to carry out that check, any act or omission that can be ascribed to the negligence of the farmer or of his representative if, as a result, it was not possible to carry out the check in its entirety? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the first question is answered in the negative: must the expression ‘prevents an on-the-spot check [from being carried out]’ be interpreted as including, as well as deliberate acts or situations deliberately brought about that make it impossible to carry out that check, any act or omission that can be ascribed to the negligence of the farmer or of his representative if, as a result, it was not possible to carry out the check in its entirety?

| 3. | If Question 2 is answered in the affirmative: is the imposition of the sanction under Article 23(2) of Regulation No 796/2004/EC (1) conditional upon the farmer’s having been adequately informed of that part of the check which requires his cooperation? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If Question 2 is answered in the affirmative: is the imposition of the sanction under Article 23(2) of Regulation No 796/2004/EC (1) conditional upon the farmer’s having been adequately informed of that part of the check which requires his cooperation?

1

| 4. | When the holder does not live on the agricultural holding, must the issue of the definition of ‘representative’ for the purpose of Article 23(2) of Regulation No 796/2004/EC be considered in the light of national law or of Community/Union law? |
| --- | --- |

4.

When the holder does not live on the agricultural holding, must the issue of the definition of ‘representative’ for the purpose of Article 23(2) of Regulation No 796/2004/EC be considered in the light of national law or of Community/Union law?

| 5. | If the issue in Question 4 has to be considered in the light of Community/Union law: must Article 23(2) of Regulation No 796/2004/EC be interpreted as meaning that any adult, having proper capacity, who lives on the holding and to whom the farmer entrusts at least part of the management of that agricultural holding must be considered to be the farmer’s representative when an on-the-spot check is carried out? |
| --- | --- |

5.

If the issue in Question 4 has to be considered in the light of Community/Union law: must Article 23(2) of Regulation No 796/2004/EC be interpreted as meaning that any adult, having proper capacity, who lives on the holding and to whom the farmer entrusts at least part of the management of that agricultural holding must be considered to be the farmer’s representative when an on-the-spot check is carried out?

| 6. | If question 4 must be considered in the light of Community law and if the answer to question 5 is negative: is a person who runs an agricultural holding (the farmer for the purpose of Article 23(2) of Regulation No 796/2004/EC) but who does not live there required to appoint a representative who may, as a rule, be found on the agricultural holding at any time? |
| --- | --- |

6.

If question 4 must be considered in the light of Community law and if the answer to question 5 is negative: is a person who runs an agricultural holding (the farmer for the purpose of Article 23(2) of Regulation No 796/2004/EC) but who does not live there required to appoint a representative who may, as a rule, be found on the agricultural holding at any time?

---

(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 of 21 April 2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of cross-compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system provided for in of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers (OJ L 141, 30.4.2004, p. 18).

1

---