61985CJ0312_EN
Parties
Subject of the case
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part
Parties
IN CASE 312/85
REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY BY THE TRIBUNALE AMMINISTRATIVO REGIONALE DELLA TOSCANA ( REGIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL OF TUSCANY ) FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING IN THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THAT COURT BETWEEN
SPA VILLA BANFI, SOCIETA PER AZIONI, A COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES UNDER ITALIAN LAW, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE IN ROME,
AND
REGIONE TOSCANA ( REGION OF TUSCANY ), ISPETTORATO PROVINCIALE DELL ' AGRICOLTURA ( PROVINCIAL AGRICULTURAL INSPECTORATE ), SIENA, SVELTO RICCO AND LUIGI GARELLI,
Subject of the case
ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE TERM ' FARMER PRACTISING FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION '
WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 3 OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 72/159/EEC OF 17 APRIL 1972 ON THE MODERNIZATION OF FARMS,
Grounds
1 BY AN ORDER OF 23 JANUARY 1981, RECEIVED AT THE COURT REGISTRY ON 16 OCTOBER 1985, THE TRIBUNALE AMMINISTRATIVO REGIONALE DELLA TOSCANA ( REGIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL OF TUSCANY ) REFERRED TO THE COURT FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY A QUESTION CONCERNING THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 72/159/EEC OF 17 APRIL 1972 ON THE MODERNIZATION OF FARMS ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL, ENGLISH SPECIAL EDITION 1972 ( II ), P . 324 ).
2 THE QUESTION AROSE IN THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT BY SPA VILLA BANFI, A COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES, TO ANNUL A REFUSAL BY THE GIUNTA REGIONALE DI TOSCANA ( REGIONAL COUNCIL OF TUSCANY ) TO ALLOW IT TO PLANT NEW VINES, ON THE GROUND THAT VILLA BANFI DID NOT, UNDER ITALIAN LAW, BELONG TO THE CATEGORY OF PERSON ENTITLED TO SUBMIT DEVELOPMENT PLANS . UNDER THE TERMS OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 1162/76/EEC OF 17 MAY 1976 ON MEASURES DESIGNED TO ADJUST WINE-GROWING POTENTIAL TO MARKET REQUIREMENTS ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL 1976, L 135, P . 32 ), WHICH WAS REPLACED BY COUNCIL REGULATION NO 348/79/EEC OF 5 FEBRUARY 1979 ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL 1979, L 54, P . 81 ), THE ONLY NEW PLANTINGS OF VINES PERMITTED ARE THOSE WHICH GIVE EFFECT TO FARM DEVELOPMENT PLANS, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN BY DIRECTIVE 72/159 . ARTICLE 2 OF DIRECTIVE 72/159 INDICATES THAT A FARM IS SUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT WHERE, INTER ALIA, THE FARMER PRACTISES FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION, AND ARTICLE 3 THEREOF PROVIDES THAT MEMBER STATES ARE TO DEFINE WHAT IS MEANT BY THE EXPRESSION ' A FARMER PRACTISING FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION '
BY REFERENCE TO A NUMBER OF CRITERIA . HOWEVER, THE ITALIAN LAW IMPLEMENTING THE DIRECTIVE INCLUDES WITHIN ITS DEFINITION OF ' A FARMER PRACTISING FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION ', APART FROM NATURAL PERSONS, ONLY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVES AND FARMERS '
ASSOCIATIONS .
3 THE CASE CAME BEFORE THE TRIBUNALE AMMINISTRATIVO REGIONALE DELLA TOSCANA, WHICH WHEN ASKED TO DECIDE WHETHER IT WAS COMPATIBLE WITH DIRECTIVE 72/159 FOR A NATIONAL LAW TO RESTRICT THE BENEFITS THEREUNDER TO AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVES AND ASSOCIATIONS OF FARMERS PRACTISING FARMING AS THEIR MAIN OCCUPATION, STAYED THE PROCEEDINGS AND REQUESTED THE COURT OF JUSTICE TO GIVE A PRELIMINARY RULING ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE TERM ' FARMER PRACTISING FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION '
FOR THE PURPOSES OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE DIRECTIVE .
4 FOR A FULLER EXPOSITION OF THE NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY LAW AT ISSUE, THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE COURSE OF THE PROCEDURE AND THE OBSERVATIONS SUBMITTED UNDER ARTICLE 20 OF THE PROTOCOL ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EEC, REFERENCE SHOULD BE MADE TO THE REPORT FOR THE HEARING . THEY ARE MENTIONED OR DISCUSSED HEREINAFTER ONLY IN SO FAR AS IS NECESSARY FOR THE REASONING OF THE COURT .
5 IN THE REFERENCE THE NATIONAL COURT SEEKS, IN ESSENCE, TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER ARTICLE 3 ( 1 ) OF DIRECTIVE 72/159 PERMITS MEMBER STATES, WHEN LAYING DOWN THE CRITERIA TO BE FULFILLED BY A PERSON OTHER THAN A NATURAL PERSON IN ORDER TO BE REGARDED AS A FARMER PRACTISING FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION, TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TYPES OF LEGAL PERSON FROM THE SCOPE OF THE DIRECTIVE SOLELY BY REASON OF THEIR LEGAL FORM .
6 IN ORDER TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION IT SHOULD FIRST BE NOTED THAT THE DIRECTIVE IN QUESTION, WHICH ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 1 THEREOF IS DESIGNED TO ' BRING ABOUT STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS CONDUCIVE TO A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT IN AGRICULTURAL INCOMES AND WORKING AND PRODUCTION CONDITIONS . . . ', SETS UP A SYSTEM OF INCENTIVES AND AIDS FOR ' FARMS SUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT '
WITHOUT SPECIFYING THE LEGAL FORM WHICH SUCH A FARM SHOULD ASSUME .
7 THE MEANING OF ' A FARM SUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT '
IS SET OUT EXHAUSTIVELY IN ARTICLE 2 OF THE DIRECTIVE, WHICH STATES THAT THAT IS ANY FARM WHERE THE FARMER PRACTISES FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION, POSSESSES ADEQUATE OCCUPATIONAL SKILL AND COMPETENCE, UNDERTAKES TO KEEP ACCOUNTS, AND DRAWS UP A PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN BY THE DIRECTIVE . IN ADDITION, THE LEVEL OF EARNED INCOME MUST BE BELOW THE LEVEL RECEIVED FOR NON-AGRICULTURAL WORK IN THE REGION .
8 ARTICLE 3 ( 1 ) REQUIRES MEMBER STATES TO DEFINE WHAT IS MEANT BY ' A FARMER PRACTISING FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION ', BUT CALLS FOR THE OBSERVANCE OF CERTAIN MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS IN THE CASE OF A NATURAL PERSON . THOSE REQUIREMENTS MUST ENSURE, AT LEAST, THAT THE FARMER DERIVES NOT LESS THAN 50% OF HIS INCOME FROM FARMING AND DEVOTES TO IT MORE THAN HALF OF HIS WORKING TIME - MEMBER STATES BEING AT LIBERTY TO IMPOSE STRICTER CONDITIONS ON THOSE TWO POINTS . IT IS IN THE LIGHT OF THOSE CRITERIA IN PARTICULAR THAT MEMBER STATES ARE REQUIRED BY ARTICLE 3 ( 1 ) TO DEFINE THE AFORESAID TERM IN RELATION TO A PERSON OTHER THAN A NATURAL PERSON .
9 IN SETTING OUT THE COMMUNITY ' S DEFINITION OF ' A FARM SUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT ', ARTICLES 2 AND 3 DELIMIT THE CLASS OF PERSON BENEFITING UNDER THE SYSTEM INTRODUCED BY THE DIRECTIVE, WITHOUT LEAVING MEMBER STATES ANY LATITUDE FOR WITHHOLDING THE BENEFITS FROM FARMS WHICH FULFIL THE CONDITIONS .
10 IT SHOULD THUS BE NOTED THAT THE DIRECTIVE NOT ONLY DOES NOT EXCLUDE LEGAL PERSONS BUT EXPRESSLY INCLUDES THEM WITHIN ITS SCOPE PROVIDED THAT THEY FULFIL THE CONDITIONS OF ARTICLE 2 AND MEET THE DEFINITION OF ' A FARMER PRACTISING FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION '
LAID DOWN IN IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 3 ( 1 ). SINCE THOSE CONDITIONS ARE UNRELATED TO THE FORM IN WHICH A LEGAL PERSON IS CONSTITUTED, THE INFERENCE TO BE DRAWN IS THAT MEMBER STATES ARE NOT PERMITTED TO WITHHOLD FROM LEGAL PERSONS THE BENEFIT OF PROVISIONS OF THE DIRECTIVE SOLELY BECAUSE THEY HAVE ASSUMED A SPECIFIC LEGAL FORM . DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT SUCH AS THAT WOULD, IN ANY EVENT, CONFLICT WITH THE PRINCIPLE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION ENSHRINED IN ARTICLE 40 ( 3 ) OF THE EEC TREATY WHICH MEMBER STATES MUST OBSERVE WHEN GIVING EFFECT TO THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY .
11 CONSEQUENTLY, THE ANSWER TO BE GIVEN IS THAT ARTICLE 3 ( 1 ) OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 72/159/EEC MUST BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT MEMBER STATES, WHEN LAYING DOWN THE CRITERIA TO BE FULFILLED BY A PERSON OTHER THAN A NATURAL PERSON IN ORDER TO BE REGARDED AS A FARMER PRACTISING FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION, ARE NOT PERMITTED TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TYPES OF LEGAL PERSON FROM THE SCOPE OF THE DIRECTIVE SOLELY BY REASON OF THEIR LEGAL FORM .
Decision on costs
COSTS
12 THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, WHICH HAS SUBMITTED OBSERVATIONS TO THE COURT, ARE NOT RECOVERABLE . AS THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE, IN SO FAR AS THE PARTIES TO THE MAIN ACTION ARE CONCERNED, IN THE NATURE OF A STEP IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE NATIONAL COURT, THE DECISION ON COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT .
Operative part
ON THOSE GROUNDS,
THE COURT ( FIRST CHAMBER ),
IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION REFERRED TO IT BY THE TRIBUNALE AMMINISTRATIVO REGIONALE DELLA TOSCANA BY ORDER OF 23 JANUARY 1981, HEREBY RULES :
ARTICLE 3 ( 1 ) OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 72/159/EEC OF 17 APRIL 1972 ON THE MODERNIZATION OF FARMS MUST BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT MEMBER STATES, WHEN LAYING DOWN THE CRITERIA TO BE FULFILLED BY A PERSON OTHER THAN A NATURAL PERSON IN ORDER TO BE REGARDED AS A FARMER PRACTISING FARMING AS HIS MAIN OCCUPATION, ARE NOT PERMITTED TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN TYPES OF LEGAL PERSON FROM THE SCOPE OF THE DIRECTIVE SOLELY BY REASON OF THEIR LEGAL FORM .