EN Official Journal of the European Union C 370/14

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 27 October 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France)) — Société Groupe Limagrain Holding v Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer

(Case C-402/10) (1)

(Agriculture - Regulations (EEC) No 3665/87 and No 565/80 - Export refunds - Refund paid in advance - Placing of goods under the customs warehousing procedure - Absence of stock records - Proof that the goods were exported - Acquisition of all or part of the refund relating to that exportation - Obligation to repay the amount unduly received - Application of a surcharge to the amount to be repaid)

2011/C 370/22

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Société Groupe Limagrain Holding

Defendant: Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Conseil d’État (France) — Interpretation of provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products (OJ 1987 L 351, p. 1) in conjunction with the provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 565/80 of 4 March 1980 on the advance payment of export refunds in respect of agricultural products (OJ 1980 L 62, p. 5) — Placing of goods under the customs warehousing procedure with view to export and advance payment of refunds — Repayment of sums received in advance in absence of stock records — Conditions of repayment

Operative part of the judgment

1. The provisions of European Union law on the advance financing of export refunds must be interpreted as meaning that the maintenance, in accordance with the European Union customs legislation, of stock records in respect of products placed under the customs warehousing procedure constitutes a condition of advance payment of an export refund with regard to those products. However, any remaining doubts as to the accuracy of certain entries or as to discrepancies in those stock records may be resolved by reference to other additional documents, on condition that those documents are deemed by the competent national authorities to be satisfactory.

2. The provisions of European Union law on the advance financing of export refunds must be interpreted as meaning that: — to the extent to which, and on condition that, there has been a failure to comply with the obligation to maintain, in accordance with the European Union customs legislation, stock records in respect of products placed under the customs warehousing procedure, proof that products similar in quantity and type to those referred to in the advance payment declaration have been exported is not sufficient for the exporter to be regarded as having properly obtained the amount of the export refund relating to those products; — in the case where, by reason of a failure to comply with the obligation to maintain stock records in respect of products placed in a customs warehouse, the exporter must repay all or part of the sums received as advance payment of an export refund, the surcharge of 20 % provided for in the second subparagraph of Article 33(1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products, as amended by, inter alia, Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1708/93 of 30 June 1993, is to be applied to the amount unduly received and to be repaid.

(1) OJ C 288, 23.10.2010.