3.

I propose to begin by considering the four legislative instruments — two Community and two national — whose relationship is at issue between the parties to the main proceedings. Adopted in the framework of the Mansholt Plan, Directive 72/159 seeks to bring about a significant improvement in agricultural incomes, and working and production conditions, by giving incentives to farms capable of development. To that end Article 1 (1) provides that Member States are to introduce a system of selective measures designed to encourage the operation and development of farms under rational conditions, whilst Article 1 (2) authorizes them to vary according to region the amount of the financial incentives provided for in the directive and, in some regions, to withhold them in whole or in part. Under Article 2 a farm is to be considered suitable for development where its owner practises farming as his main occupation, possesses adequate occupational skill and competence, undertakes to keep accounts, draws up a development plan which satisfies the conditions laid down in the directive and has a level of earned income lower than that received for nonagricultural work in the region. There follows the crucial Article 3. The first subparagraph of Article 3 (1) provides: ‘Member States shall for the purposes of this directive define what is meant by the expression “a farmer practising farming as his main occupation”, [which] shall, in the case of a natural person, at least include the condition that the proportion of income from farming be not less than 50% of the farmer's total income and [the further condition] that the working time devoted to non-farming activities be less than half of the farmer's total working time’. The second subparagraph goes on: ‘Having regard, in particular, to the criteria indicated in the preceding subparagraph, Member States shall define the aforesaid expression in relation to a person other than a natural person, and in respect of a farm owned by a person other than the farmer,... [or] worked under a sharecropping agreement’. The Italian Republic sought to implement the abovementioned directive by enacting Law No 153 of 9 May 1975(Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana, p. 3298). Artide 13, in Title III (on the modernization and expansion of agricultural structures), Section I (on aid for carrying out development plans) provides inter alia that the aid available under that title may be granted not only to natural persons but also to agricultural cooperatives set up in accordance with the rules on cooperation, and to farmers' associations. It is further necessary that the members derive at least 50% of their income from farming and related activities, and that they devote to it at least 50% of their working time. Those principles were observed by Tuscan Regional Law No 71 of 7 September 1977(Bollettino Ufficiale della Regione Toscana [Official Journal of Tuscany] No 52 of 16 September 1977). Law No 71 sets up an aid scheme which, under Article 6, applies to the following: (a) owner farmers, tenant farmers, sharecroppers and tenants in kind; (b) owners, holders of a life interest [‘usufruttuari’] and tenants who are farm managers, provided that they are engaged in agriculture as their main occupation; (c) agricultural cooperatives; and (d) farmers' associations, but, again, only on condition that they devote themselves principally to agriculture. The last instrument for consideration is Council Regulation (EEC) No 1162/76 of 17 May 1976, which contains measures designed to adjust winegrowing potential to market requirements (Official Journal 1976, L 135, p. 32). Article 2 (1) of this regulation prohibits ‘all new planting of vine varieties classified as wine grape varieties for the administrative unit concerned... during the period from 1 December 1976 to 30 November 1978’. Provision is made, however, for certain exemptions; in particular, new plantings carried out by farmers under development plans which meet the conditions laid down in Council Directive 72/159 are exempted. In its preamble the regulation justifies that exemption by reference to its relative unimportance; in addition, however, the exemption meets the obvious requirement that the work of growers who have obtained approval for such plans should not be impeded, especially in view of the fairly long period allowed for their implementation (in the case of Italy, up to nine years; Article 14 of Law No 153). Lastly, I would point out that the Commission of the European Communities, by Decisions No 76/480 (as regards the national legislation) and No 77/525 (as regards the regional legislation), declared the Italian implementing measures to be in conformity with Directive 72/159 and accordingly approved them, thereby allowing the resultant expenditure incurred by the Italian Republic to qualify for Community financing (Official Journal 1976, L 138, p. 14, and 1977, L 209, p. 25).