Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2014:2014
Date: 2014-06-19
Language of the case: English
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: United Kingdom

Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 6 November 2014 1. Agriculture — Common agricultural policy — Integrated administration and control system for certain aid schemes — Single payment scheme — Calculation of the reference amount — Payment entitlements from the national reserve — Conditions for granting — Farmers finding themselves in a special situation — The ‘best value’ rule (Council Regulation No 1782/2003, Art. 42(4); Commission Regulation No 795/2004, as amended by Regulation No 1974/2004, Art. 18(2)) 2. Agriculture — Common agricultural policy — Integrated administration and control system for certain aid schemes — Single payment scheme — Calculation of the reference amount — Payment entitlements from the national reserve — Conditions for granting — Farmers finding themselves in a special situation — Difference in treatment between farmers who had faced exceptional circumstances in comparison with those who did not face such circumstances — Infringement of the principle of non-discrimination (Council Regulation No 1782/2003, Arts 37(1), 40, 41(2) and 42(7); Commission Regulation No 795/2004, as amended by Regulation No 1974/2004, Arts 18(2) and 19 to 23a) 3. Agriculture — Common agricultural policy — Discretion of the EU institutions — Scope — Limits — Principles of proportionality and equal treatment (Art. 40 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1782/2003; Commission Regulation No 795/2004, as amended by Regulation No 1974/2004, Art. 18(2)) 4. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Assessment of validity — Declaration that an EU act is invalid — Effects — Application by analogy of Article 264 TFEU (Arts 264, second para., TFEU and 267 TFEU) 1. Article 18(2) of Regulation No 795/2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the single payment scheme provided for in 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 1974/2004, must be interpreted as applying, first, in the case where a farmer meets the conditions for the application of any two or more of Articles 19 to 23a of Regulation No 795/2004, as amended by Regulation No 1974/2004, and, second, in the case where a farmer who meets the conditions for the application of at least one of Articles 19 to 23a of Regulation No 795/2004, as amended by Regulation No 1974/2004, also meets the conditions for the application of at least one of Articles 37(2), 40, 42(3) and 42(5) of Regulation No 1782/2003. (see para. 45, operative part 1) 2. Article 18(2) of Regulation No 795/2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the single payment scheme provided for in 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 1974/2004, is invalid in so far as it precludes a farmer who has suffered exceptional circumstances, within the meaning of Article 40 of Regulation No 1782/2003, from benefiting from both an adjustment of his reference amount under that provision and an additional reference amount from the national reserve under one of Articles 19 to 23a of Regulation No 795/2004, whereas a farmer who has not faced such circumstances and who has been allocated a reference amount calculated pursuant to Article 37(1) of Regulation No 1782/2003 may receive both that amount and a reference amount from the national reserve under one of Articles 19 to 23a of Regulation No 795/2004. Article 18(2) of Regulation No 795/2004, as amended by Regulation No 1974/2004, establishes a difference in treatment between, on the one hand, a farmer who has experienced exceptional circumstances entitling him to an adjustment of his reference amount under Article 40 of Regulation No 1782/2003 and, on the other, a farmer who has not faced such circumstances and who is allocated a reference amount calculated in accordance with the general rule laid down in Article 37(1) of that regulation. The provision at issue places the first farmer at a disadvantage in relation to the second by depriving him of the benefit of a reference amount from the national reserve in addition to his reference amount as adjusted under Article 40 of Regulation No 1782/2003. In that regard, since a farmer allocated a reference amount calculated pursuant to Article 37(1) of Regulation No 1782/2003 and a farmer benefiting from an adjustment in the method of calculating his reference amount under Article 40 of that regulation, who both apply for the grant of additional entitlements from the national reserve, are in comparable situations in the light of the objectives of the single payment scheme, the difference in treatment cannot be justified by the objective of protecting the financial interests of farmers by avoiding the application of the mechanism provided for in Articles 41(2) and 42(7) of Regulation No 1782/2003. That mechanism, which provides for a linear reduction of the reference amounts allocated if the national ceilings are exceeded by reason of an increased recourse to the national reserve, constitutes a means of safeguarding the financial balance of the single payment scheme while observing the principle of equal treatment. The objective of avoiding the application of that mechanism cannot therefore justify an infringement of that principle. (see paras 48, 54, 57, 58, 61, operative part 2) 3. See the text of the decision. (see paras 49, 51, 56) 4. See the text of the decision. (see para. 65)