Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Agriculture — Approximation of laws on health policy — Financial contribution of the Community to veterinary measures taken by Member States — Emergency measures in the event of the occurrence of certain animal diseases — Reduction of the Community contribution in the event of non-compliance with the Community legislation — Whether permissible — Flat-rate adjustment — Conditions — (Council Decision 90/424, Art. 3(2))

2. Agriculture — Approximation of laws on health policy — Financial contribution of the Community to veterinary measures taken by Member States — Emergency measures in the event of the occurrence of certain animal diseases — Commission ' s power to review — Scope — Financial adjustment where the measures adopted are inadequate — Where contested by the Member State concerned — Burden of proof — (Council Decision 90/424)

3. Agriculture — Approximation of laws on health policy — Financial contribution of the Community to veterinary measures taken by Member States — Emergency measures in the event of the occurrence of certain animal diseases — Financial aid for the eradication of classical swine fever in the Netherlands — Reduction of the sums paid to breeders by way of compensation — Principle of proportionality — Breach — None — (Commission Decision 2000/362)

Summary

1. According to the actual wording of Article 3(2) of Decision 90/424 on expenditure in the veterinary field, it is only where the conditions set out in the applicable Community legislation are fulfilled that Member States are entitled to a financial contribution by the Communities towards their expenditure on emergency measures in the event of the occurrence of certain animal diseases. Nor is payment to be made pro rata if the measures required by that legislation are taken only in part. However, instead of granting no financial subsidy where a Member State has not complied with all of those conditions, the Commission may, in application of the principle of proportionality, deduct from the amount of the expenditure in respect of which the Member State seeks such a financial subsidy the expenditure occasioned by the failure to comply with those conditions and consider the financial subsidy only in respect of the remaining amount.

Furthermore, the fight against a widespread epizootic cannot be undertaken without errors and, in principle, the existence of certain errors should not preclude the Community financial subsidy. However, where such errors exceed the limit of what might be reasonably regarded as inevitable and therefore excusable in a complex and sometimes complicated situation, their financial consequences cannot be borne, even in part, by the Community and must be assumed by the Member State to which the authorities responsible for the errors belong.

As regards the fact that the Commission may rely on estimates and apply flat-rate adjustments, the Commission cannot be required to examine in detail each slaughtered animal and each case of the destruction of feedingstuffs or contaminated equipment. Both where a Member State has not complied with all the conditions laid down in the Community legislation and where there have been errors for which the Member State must assume financial responsibility, the Commission is entitled to rely on estimates or to apply flat-rate adjustments, provided that those estimates and adjustments are reasonably based on the figures available to it.

see paras 22, 24-25, 29

2. Under Decision 90/424 on expenditure in the veterinary field, the Member State concerned is required to implement a certain number of measures in order to benefit from the Community financial subsidy for the fight against certain animal diseases. As the multitude of possible situations means that the Community legislation cannot determine precisely what those measures are in each individual case, the Commission, when it evaluates the measures adopted by the Member States, must take account of the fact that the latter have a certain latitude as regards the choice of the measures to be taken and the manner in which they are to be implemented and that in that regard it cannot substitute its own assessment for that of the Member State concerned. That is a fortiori true because the applicable Community legislation includes provisions which employ wide and general terms.

On the other hand, if the Commission, while respecting the latitude enjoyed by the Member State concerned, has established that that State has not taken sufficient steps to combat the disease and that a financial adjustment must be applied, it is for that Member State to prove that the Commission has made a manifest error of assessment.

see paras 32-34

3. Decision 2000/362 on the total amount of Community aid for the eradication of classical swine fever in the Netherlands in 1997 dies not infringe the principle of proportionality in so far as the aid granted entails a reduction of 25% of the sums paid to breeders by way of compensation. As the technical, administrative and financial complaints formulated by the Commission in respect of the national measures in order to justify that decision are taken to be founded, the financial consequences calculated by the Commission are much higher than the adjustment made, which shows that the Commission took due account of the inevitable errors associated with the exercise of the latitude recognised to each Member State and also the particular complexity of the epizootic of classical swine fever in question.

see paras 48-50