Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2007:296
Date: 2007-05-24
Language of the case: Dutch
Court formation: Second Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;Beef and veal;Agricultural structures
Concepts: Structural reform of agriculture: joint action;Domestic market
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Netherlands

Summary of the Judgment 1. Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Beef and veal – Slaughter premium – Conditions for granting (European Parliament and Council Directive No 1760/2000, Recitals 4 to 7 and Art. 7(1), second indent; Council Regulation No 1254/1999, Art. 21) 2. Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Beef and veal – Slaughter premium – Conditions for granting (European Parliament and Council Directive No 1760/2000, Art. 7(1), second indent; Council Regulation No 1254/1999, Art. 21) 3. Agriculture – Common agricultural policy – Integrated administration and control system for certain aid schemes (European Parliament and Council Directive No 1760/2000, Art. 7(1), second indent; Commission Regulation No 2419/2001, Arts 44 and 45) 4. Agriculture – Common agricultural policy – Integrated administration and control system for certain aid schemes (European Parliament and Council Directive No 1760/2000, Art. 22; Commission Regulation No 3887/92, Art. 11) 1. Article 21 of Council Regulation No 1254/1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal must be interpreted as meaning that the failure to comply with the period for notification to the computerised database of the movement of a bovine animal to or from a holding, laid down in the second indent of Article 7(1) of Regulation No 1760/2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and repealing Regulation No 820/97, renders that bovine animal ineligible for a slaughter premium and, consequently, results in the exclusion of that premium for that animal. The wording of Article 21 of Regulation No 1254/1999 clearly shows, as recital 18 in the preamble thereto indicates, that the grant of a slaughter premium is subject to compliance by the keepers of the animals concerned with the relevant Community rules on identification and registration of bovine animals. Such an interpretation is borne out by the objectives pursued by Regulation No 1760/2000, which, as recitals 4 to 7 in the preamble thereto indicate, are to improve consumer confidence in the quality of beef and beef products, to preserve the protection of public health and to reinforce the lasting stability of the beef market. (see paras 32, 40, 43, operative part 1) 2. There is nothing capable of casting doubt on the validity of Article 21 of Regulation No 1254/1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal in the light of the principle of proportionality, in so far as that article renders a bovine animal in respect of which there has been a failure to comply with the notification period set out in Article 7(1), second indent, of Regulation No 1760/2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and repealing Regulation No 820/97, ineligible for the slaughter premium and consequently results in the exclusion of that premium for that animal. The obligation to comply with the notification period, which allows the competent authorities to pinpoint rapidly the origin of an animal in the event of epizootic disease and to take the necessary measures for the purpose of avoiding any risk to public health, is part of the objectives of the system for the identification and registration of bovine animals, and, inter alia, of the system seeking to ensure efficient tracing in real time of those animals, which is essential for public health reasons. Accordingly, that obligation cannot be regarded as a manifestly inappropriate means of achieving those objectives. (see paras 50, 52, operative part 2) 3. Articles 44 and 45 of Commission Regulation No 2419/2001 laying down detailed rules for applying the integrated administration and control system for certain Community aid schemes established by Council Regulation No 3508/92 do not apply to the exclusion of a slaughter premium for a bovine animal in respect of which the information regarding its movement to or from a holding was not notified to the computerised database within the period laid down in Article 7(1), second indent, of Regulation No 1760/2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and repealing Regulation No 820/97, so as to render that bovine animal eligible for a slaughter premium, even in the case where that information sent to the database in question after the expiry of the prescribed period was correct. The exceptions laid down in Articles 44 and 45 can only cover penalties. The exclusion of the slaughter premium for a bovine animal in respect of which the information regarding its movement to or from the holding was not notified to the computerised database within the period laid down in Article 7(1), second indent, of Regulation No 1760/2000, is not a penalty but the consequence of failure to fulfil those conditions for eligibility in respect of the award of that premium. (see paras 57-58, 60, operative part 3) 4. Article 11 of Regulation No 3887/92 laying down detailed rules for applying the integrated administration and control system for certain Community aid schemes and/or Article 22 of Regulation No 1760/2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and repealing Regulation No 820/97, must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State cannot lay down national penalties consisting in reductions and exclusions from the total amount of Community aid which can be claimed by a farmer who has applied for a slaughter premium, since penalties of that type are already set out in detail in Regulation No 3887/92 That interpretation is not at variance with the articles referred to above, in so far as it does not preclude Member States from adopting national penalties of a different type to the reductions or exclusions referred to in Regulation No 3887/92. (see paras 65, 67-68, operative part 4)