Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2000:695
Date: 2000-12-14
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Full Court
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries
Concepts: Export refunds
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Judgment 
Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Export refunds — Non-differ­
entiated refund — Products immediately re-imported into the Community after comple­
tion of the customs formalities for release for home use in a non-member country — Loss 
of right to a refund — Condition — Evidence of abuse — Verification incumbent on 
national court 
(Commission Regulations No 2730/79, Arts 9(1), 10(1) and 20(2) to (6), and No 568/85) 
I - 11569 
SUMMARY — CASE C-110/99 
Articles 9(1), 10(1) and 20(2) to (6) of 
Regulation No 2730/79 laying down com­
mon detailed rules for the application of 
the system of export refunds on agricultural 
products, in the version resulting from 
Regulation No 568/85, must be interpreted 
as meaning that a Community exporter can 
forfeit his right to payment of a non-
differentiated export refund if (a) the 
product in respect of which the export 
refund was paid, and which is sold to a 
purchaser established in a non-member 
country, is, immediately after its release 
for home use in that non-member country, 
transported back to the Community under 
the external Community transit procedure 
and is there released for home use on 
payment of import duties, without any 
infringement being established and (b) that 
operation constitutes an abuse on the part 
of that Community exporter. 
A finding that there is an abuse presupposes 
an intention on the part of the Community 
exporter to benefit from an advantage as a 
result of the application of the Community 
rules by artificially creating the conditions 
for obtaining it. Evidence of this must be 
placed before the national court in accord­
ance with the rules of national law, for 
instance by establishing that there was 
collusion between that exporter and the 
importer of the goods into the non-member 
country. 
The fact that, before being re-imported into 
the Community, the product was sold by 
the purchaser established in the non-mem­
ber country concerned to an undertaking 
also established in that country with which 
he has personal and commercial links is one 
of the facts which can be taken into 
account by the national court when ascer­
taining whether the conditions giving rise 
to an obligation to repay refunds are 
fulfilled. 
(see para. 59 and operative part) 
I-11570