Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2012:171
Date: 2012-03-29
Language of the case: Lithuanian
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Subject matter: Accession;Agriculture and Fisheries
Procedure: Action for annulment - successful
Origin: Lithuania

Summary of the Judgment 1. Accession of new Member States to the Communities — 2003 Act of Accession — Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Transitional measures in respect of trade in agricultural products (2003 Act of Accession, Annex IV, point 4(2)) 2. Accession of new Member States to the Communities — 2003 Act of Accession — Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Transitional measures in respect of trade in agricultural products (2003 Act of Accession, Annex IV, point 4(2)) 1. Under point 4(2) of Annex IV to the Act of Accession to the European Union of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic, any stock of agricultural products, private as well as public, in free circulation at the date of accession within the territory of the new Member States exceeding the quantity which could be regarded as constituting a normal carryover of stock must be eliminated at the expense of the new Member States. The meaning and scope of the term ‘to eliminate’ must be determined by considering the general context in which that term is used and its usual meaning in everyday language. Consequently, as regards agricultural products, in everyday language, the term ‘eliminated’, as used in point 4(2) of Annex IV to the Act of Accession, has the meaning of ‘destroyed’ or ‘taken off the market’. Furthermore, agricultural products in free circulation within the territory of the Member States are intended to be absorbed by the market. Consequently, the statement in point 4(2) of Annex IV to the Act of Accession that the surpluses must be eliminated cannot be understood as referring to the absorption of the surpluses by the market. As regards the purpose of point 4(2) of Annex IV to the Act of Accession, it is primarily to prevent disruption to the functioning of the mechanisms provided for by the common organisation of the market in agricultural products and, in particular, disruption affecting price formation and arising as a result of the accumulation of abnormal quantities of agricultural products in the new Member States before their accession to the European Union. Furthermore, in order to safeguard the effectiveness of point 4(2) of Annex IV to the Act of Accession, the purpose of that provision must be regarded as being also that of correcting the effects of the disruption caused by the sale of the surpluses on the internal market. Consequently, the arrangements that the Commission is responsible for implementing under point 4(4) of that Annex serve to ensure either that the disruption caused by the sale of those surpluses on the internal market is prevented or that the economic effects of that disruption are compensated for. Under that system, the surpluses existing within the territory of the new Member States on 1 May 2004 are in principle withdrawn from the market at their expense, inter alia by the export of the surpluses outside of the internal market or by the destruction of those surpluses. Lastly, point 4(2) of Annex IV to the Act of Accession does not state that the new Member States are required to eliminate the surpluses themselves. Furthermore, the Commission, when exercising the powers regarding the common agricultural policy which the Act of Accession conferred on it for implementation of the rules laid down by that Act, may consider it necessary to exercise a broad discretion, so that the legality of a measure adopted in that sphere can be affected only if the measure is manifestly inappropriate having regard to the objective which the competent institution is seeking to pursue. Consequently, it is conceivable that a system under which, first, the Community ensures that the surpluses existing within the territory of the new Member States at the date of accession are destroyed or exported outside of the internal market and, secondly, the cost of those operations is then passed on to the new Member States is also compatible with point 4(2) of Annex IV to the Act of Accession. (see paras 40-41, 43, 46-48) 2. Even though the Commission has a broad discretion in the implementation of point 4(2) of Annex IV to the Act of Accession to the European Union of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic, it cannot, under that provision, impose a straightforward obligation to pay on the new Member States for the benefit of the Community unless that obligation to pay may be regarded as constituting a financial contribution to cover the expenses of the elimination of the surpluses from the internal market. The payment of a financial amount to the Community budget imposed on the new Member States by Decision 2007/361 on the determination of surplus stocks of agricultural products other than sugar and the financial consequences of their elimination in relation to the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia is not therefore compatible with point 4(2) of Annex IV to the Act of Accession, since the system provided for by that decision for the elimination of surpluses of agricultural products is not based on the destruction or the export outside of the internal market of those surpluses and the obligation of the new Member States to bear the expense of eliminating those surpluses takes the form of a straightforward obligation to pay into the Community budget a financial amount calculated on the basis of the volume of the surpluses of each agricultural product concerned. The financial amounts provided for by the decision reflect the cost which would have had to be borne by the Community budget if the Community had financed the export outside of the internal market of the surpluses found to exist. However, the decision does not provide for such export. Consequently, the amounts referred to by that decision cannot be regarded as the consideration for, or meeting of the cost of, certain elimination operations undertaken by the Community. It is a straightforward obligation to pay imposed on the new Member States for the benefit of the Community. It is admittedly conceivable that the existence of an obligation for the new Member States to pay a financial amount to the Community budget may be regarded as a supplementary mechanism, in the context of a system for the physical elimination of surpluses, needed to ensure that the necessary additional cost of dealing with any disruption to the agricultural markets caused by surpluses that have not been eliminated from the internal market in a manner consistent with the rules provided for by that system does not fall on the Community budget or on Community producers but on the Member States concerned. Nevertheless, the financial amounts referred to by Decision 2007/361 do not constitute such a supplementary mechanism. On the contrary, the obligation to pay those financial amounts replaces the elimination from the internal market of the surpluses in question and constitutes the only elimination mechanism provided for by the contested decision. Likewise, that obligation does not in itself constitute any direct benefit for Community producers. (see paras 49-52, 75, 77, 79)