Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2007:513
Date: 2007-09-13
Language of the case: German
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;Transport;Plant health legislation
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Judgment 1. Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Export refunds – Conditions for granting (Council Regulation No 805/68, as amended by Regulation No 2634/97, Art. 13(9); Commission Regulation No 615/98; Council Directive 91/628, as amended by Directive 95/29) 2. Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Export refunds – Conditions for granting (Commission Regulation No 615/98, Art 5(3); Council Directive 91/628, as amended by Directive 95/29) 1. The simple fact that payment of export refunds for live bovine animals is subject, under Regulation No 615/98 laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during transport, to compliance with a number of conditions laid down in Community legislation pursuing objectives which are specific to that legislation cannot of itself be regarded as a ground of invalidity in relation to that regulation, since objectives thus pursued are not only perfectly legitimate but also constitute obligations to which, under Community law, all the Member States and institutions are continuously and permanently subject in the formulation and implementation of the common agricultural policy. While it is true that a directive cannot of itself impose obligations on an individual, it cannot be precluded, in principle, that the provisions of a directive may be applicable by means of an express reference in a regulation to its provisions, provided that general principles of law and, in particular, the principle of legal certainty, are observed. Moreover, the purpose of the general reference made by Regulation No 615/98 to Directive 91/628 on the protection of animals during transport, as amended by Directive 95/29, is to ensure, for the purposes of the implementation of Article 13(9) of Regulation No 805/68 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal, as amended by Regulation No 2634/97, compliance with the relevant provisions of that directive on the welfare of live animals and, in particular, the protection of animals during transport. That reference, which lays down the conditions for the grant of refunds, cannot therefore be interpreted as covering all the provisions in Directive 91/628 and, in particular, those provisions which have no connection with the principle objective pursued by that directive. (see paras 26-29) 2. Article 5(3) of Regulation No 615/98 laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during transport must be interpreted as meaning that non-compliance with Directive 91/628 on the protection of animals during transport, as amended by Directive 95/29, which may result in a reduction in or forfeiture of export refunds relates to the provisions of that directive which have an impact on the welfare of animals, that is to say, their physical condition and/or their health, and does not relate to the provisions of that directive which, in principle, have no such impact. The conditions laid down in that provision are therefore consonant with the principle of proportionality. It is for the national court to assess whether the competent authorities have applied the relevant provisions of Regulation No 615/98 in a manner that is consonant with that principle. (see paras 42-43, 46)