Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2008:158
Date: 2008-03-13
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Third Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;Transport;Plant health legislation
Concepts: Export refunds
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Judgment 1. Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Export refunds – Conditions for granting (Commission Regulation No 615/98, Arts 4 and 5(2) and (3); Council Directive 91/628, as amended by Directive 95/29) 2. Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Export refunds (Commission Regulation No 615/98, Art. 5(3); Council Directive 91/628, as amended by Directive 95/29) 1. Despite the documents produced by the exporter in accordance with Article 5(2) of Regulation No 615/98 laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during transport, the competent authority may consider that Directive 91/628 on the protection of animals during transport, as amended by Directive 95/29, has not been complied with pursuant to Article 5(3) of that regulation. However, the competent authority can arrive at that conclusion only if it bases itself on the documents referred to in Article 5 of Regulation No 615/98, on the reports referred to in Article 4 of that regulation concerning animal health, or on any other objective element with implications for the welfare of the animals such as to call into question the documents presented by the exporter, it being for the latter to show, if appropriate, that the elements relied on by the competent authority in substantiation of its finding of non‑compliance with Directive 91/628, are not relevant. (see paras 36, 39‑42, 44, operative part 1) 2. Pursuant to Article 5(3) of Regulation No 615/98 laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during transport, the competent authority may refuse the export refund for failure to comply with the provisions of Directive 91/628 concerning the protection of animals during transport, as amended by Directive 95/29 concerning animal health, even in the absence of evidence showing that the welfare of the animals transported was, in fact, adversely affected. The Community legislature considered, on the basis of scientific and veterinary studies as well as assessments of the application of Community legislation carried out in the animal protection field, that once the provisions of Directive 91/628 concerning the health of those animals are no longer complied with, the welfare of the animals is liable to be endangered and can no longer be guaranteed. Such an approach appears moreover to be fully justified by the circumstance that, in practice, it is not always possible for the competent authority to ascertain that the animals have actually suffered, or been injured, as a result of non‑compliance with those provisions. (see paras 48‑49, 52, operative part 2)