Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2010:265
Date: 2010-05-11
Language of the case: German
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;General provisions
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Judgment 1. Agriculture – Common agricultural policy – Integrated administration and control system for certain aid schemes – Single payment scheme – Concept of area eligible for aid (Council Regulation No 1782/2003, as amended by Regulation No 2013/2006, Arts 2(c), and 44(2); Commission Regulation No 796/2004, Art. 2, paras 1 and 2) 2. Agriculture – Common agricultural policy – Integrated administration and control system for certain aid schemes – Single payment scheme – Concept of area forming part of farmer’s holding (Council Regulation No 1782/2003, as amended by Regulation No 2013/2006, Art. 44(2)) 1. Article 44(2) of Regulation 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, as amended by Regulation No 2013/2006, must be interpreted as not precluding an area from being eligible for aid where, while it is admittedly also used for agricultural purposes, the overriding objective is landscape management and nature conservation. In addition, according to that provision, the fact that the farmer is subject to the instructions of the nature conservation authority does not deprive an activity which meets the definition referred to in Article 2(c) of that regulation of its agricultural character. Classification as ‘arable land’ or ‘permanent pasture’ and, consequently, as ‘agricultural area’, depends on the actual use of the land in question. It follows that the fact that parcels of land which are actually used as arable land or as permanent pasture have the overriding purpose of nature and landscape conservation cannot preclude those parcels from being classified as agricultural land within the meaning of Article 2 points (1) and (2) of Regulation No 796/2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of cross-compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system provided for in Regulation 1782/2003, particularly because environmental protection is an objective which forms part of the common agricultural policy. It follows, first, that the fact that an area has an overriding nature and landscape conservation objective does not deprive it of its agricultural character for the purposes of Article 44(2) of Regulation No 1782/2003 where the land is actually being used as arable land or pasture. Second, provided that an agricultural area is used for an agricultural activity within the meaning of Article 2(c) of that regulation, it is irrelevant, for the purposes of Article 44(2), whether the activity has an essentially agricultural or nature conservation objective. (see paras 37-39, 41, 47, 49, operative part 1) 2. Article 44(2) of Regulation No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, as amended by Regulation No 2013/2006 as amended, must be interpreted as meaning that: - it is not necessary, for an agricultural area to be considered as allocated to the farmer’s holding, that it be at his disposal against payment on the basis of a lease or another similar type of contract to let; - the allocation of an agricultural area to a holding is not precluded by the fact that the area is placed at the farmer’s disposal free of charge, the farmer being obliged only to take over the contributions to a trade association, for a specific use and for a limited period of time in accordance with the objectives of nature conservation, on condition that the farmer is able to use that area with a degree of autonomy sufficient for his agricultural activities for a period of at least 10 months; - it is without prejudice to the allocation of the area in question to the farmer’s holding that the farmer is obliged to carry out certain tasks for a third party in return for payment, provided that the area is also used by the farmer for his own agricultural activities in his name and on his own behalf. (see para. 71, operative part 2)