Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2014:64
Date: 2014-02-06
Language of the case: Dutch
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Netherlands

Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 5 June 2014 Agriculture — Common agricultural policy — Direct support schemes — Common rules — Single payment scheme — Calculation of payment entitlements — Taking into account of the area of the agricultural parcel — Obligation to recalculate in the event of an incorrect determination of the area (Council Regulation No 73/2009, Art. 137 ; Commission Regulation No 796/2004, as amended by Regulation No 380/2009, Art. 73a (2a)) Article 73a(2a) of Regulation No 796/2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of cross-compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system provided for in Regulations No 1782/2003 and No 73/2009, as well as for the implementation of cross-compliance provided for in Regulation No 479/2008, as amended by Regulation No 380/2009, must be interpreted as meaning that a farmer’s payment entitlements must be recalculated when, in the initial determination of his payment entitlements, that farmer’s reference amount was divided by too high a number of hectares because of the method for determining the area of agricultural parcels used at that time in the Member State concerned. Article 137 of Regulation No 73/2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations No 1290/2005, No 247/2006, No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation No 1782/2003 does not apply to a correction under Article 73a(2a) of Regulation No 796/2004. Where, the competent authorities have taken features of the landscape such as banks, paths and ditches into account in determining a farmer’s agricultural parcels, the view must be taken that the number of payment entitlements granted to that farmer was incorrect within the meaning of Article 73a(2a) of Regulation No 796/2004. In that regard, it must be presumed that the farmer concerned was not able reasonably to have detected the errors in the establishment of the area of his parcels since they were the direct result of the method then used by the competent national authorities. In addition, since the purpose of Article 137(1) of Regulation No 73/2009 is, for reasons connected with the principle of legal certainty, to protect farmers acting in good faith who had received undue payments and not, in the future, to penalise farmers who were granted too high a number of payment entitlements, Article 73a(2a) of Regulation No 796/2004 does not come within the scope of Article 137(1) of Regulation No 73/2009. (see paras 47, 49- 51, 54, 55, 59, operative part)