Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2014:2134
Date: 2014-09-03
Language of the case: Lithuanian
Court formation: Second Chamber
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;Economic, social and territorial cohesion;Fisheries policy;European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Lithuania

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 3 September 2014 1. Economic, social and territorial cohesion — Structural assistance — EU funding — Regulation No 1260/1999 — Obligation for the Member States to prevent, detect and correct irregularities — Concept of irregularity — Obligation to inform the Commission of irregularities found (Council Regulation No 1260/1999, Art. 38(1)(e)) 2. Fisheries — Common structural policy — EU financial assistance — Notification of aid schemes — Scope — Obligation to implement an aid scheme with the objective of financing a project unfairly deprived of the opportunity of benefitting from funding — Not included (Council Regulation No 2792/1999, as amended by Regulation No 2369/2002, Art. 19) 3. Acts of the institutions — Guidelines on the closure of Structural Funds — No binding effect — Consideration by the national court — Obligation — Scope (Council Regulation No 1260/1999) 4. Fisheries — Common structural policy — EU financial assistance — Review — Obligations of the Member State authorities (Council Regulations No 1260/1999, Art. 38(1)(e), and No 2792/1999, as amended by Regulation No 2369/2002, Art. 19) 1. The concept of ‘irregularity’ referred to in Article 38(1)(e) of Regulation No 1260/1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds must be interpreted as concerning any infringement of EU law as a result of an act or omission which could be detrimental to the general budget of the European Union. In the light of that definition of ‘irregularity’, Article 38(1)(e) of Regulation No 1260/1999 must be interpreted as obliging the Member States to prevent, detect and correct irregularities of EU law resulting from an act or omission which could be detrimental to the general budget of the European Union, to inform the Commission of such irregularities, and to keep it informed of the progress of administrative and legal proceedings concerning those irregularities. (see paras 49, 50) 2. Article 19 of Regulation No 2792/1999 laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector, as amended by Regulation No 2369/2002, does not in any way oblige the Member States concerned to implement an aid scheme with the purpose of financing a project which had been wrongly prevented from receiving financial assistance. (see para. 63) 3. See the text of the decision. (see paras 64, 65) 4. Article 38(1)(e) of Regulation No 1260/1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, Article 19 of Regulation No 2792/1999 laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector, as amended by Regulation No 2369/2002, and Sections 6 and 7 of the Guidelines on the closure of assistance (2000 to 2006) from the Structural Funds, adopted by Decision COM(2006)3424 final of 1 August 2006, must be interpreted as neither obliging the State authorities concerned to inform the European Commission of the existence of court proceedings relating to an administrative decision on the eligibility of an application for financial assistance such as that at issue in the main proceedings, nor to take the measures necessary so that funds that have been provided are reserved for the disputed assistance until the question of the award of the assistance has been finally decided. However, it should be noted that those provisions of EU law do not affect actions for damages brought against a State on the basis of an alleged infringement of national law. (see paras 69, 70, operative part)