Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Economic and social cohesion – Structural assistance – Community financing – Decision to suspend, reduce or cancel assistance initially granted – Refunding of sums unduly paid – Obligation on the recipient of the assistance

(Council Regulations Nos 2052/88, Arts 4(1) and 5(2), 4253/88, Art. 24 and 4256/88, Art. 8)

2. Economic and social cohesion – Structural assistance – Community financing – Obligation on the recipient to provide information and act in good faith – Irregularities committed by a third party acting in the name of the recipient – Irregularities committed by a director – Imputed to the recipient

3. Economic and social cohesion – Structural assistance – Community financing – Sums paid to third parties – Sums regarded as having been paid directly to the recipient of the financing – Conditions

4. Procedure – Request for measures of inquiry and of organisation of procedure – Request made at a stage of the procedure other than that allowing the production of new evidence – Lawfulness – Conditions

(Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Arts 44(1)(e), and 48(1))

Summary

1. Article 24 of Regulation No 4253/88 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments does not expressly state who should be the addressee of a decision to cancel Community assistance or whose obligation it is to refund to the Commission sums unduly paid.

It is clear, however, from Articles 4(1) and 5(2) of Regulation No 2052/88 on the tasks of the Structural Funds and their effectiveness and on coordination of their activities between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments, as amended, that where Community assistance takes the form of direct financing by the Commission of pilot and demonstration projects, decisions taken under Regulation No 4253/88, as amended, are addressed to the individual recipients of Community assistance. It follows that, in the case of a project financed directly by the Commission under Article 8 of Regulation No 4256/88 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation No 2052/88 as regards the EAGGF Guidance Section, a decision to cancel community assistance must be addressed to the recipient of that assistance, who must therefore be under the duty to repay.

(see paras 61, 88)

2. A recipient of Community financial assistance cannot relinquish its obligation towards the Commission to provide information and to act in good faith by using the services of a third party rather than its own resources. Therefore, any failing on the part of the third party in carrying out the instructions of a director of the recipient company is attributable to the recipient company.

The recipient company also bears responsibility for serious irregularities consisting in the participation of its director in deception designed to misdirect payments by way of Community assistance away from the purposes for which they had been intended. The involvement of other persons in those irregularities cannot exonerate the recipient from its liability for acts committed in its name by its director.

(see paras 70, 79-80)

3. Sums paid by the Commission to third parties on the recipient’s instructions must be regarded in the same way as sums which the Commission pays directly to the recipient as Community financing. However, where the recipient has given no such instructions and no such instructions can be attributed to it, those sums cannot be regarded as having been paid to the same recipient.

(see paras 90-91)

4. In order to allow the Court to determine whether a measure of organisation of procedure which has been requested is conducive to proper conduct of the procedure, the party requesting it must provide the Court with at least minimum information indicating the utility of the measure for the purposes of the proceedings. If such a request is designed to obtain new factual evidence and is made at a stage in the procedure when the production of new evidence is in principle no longer allowed, it is necessary in particular for the party requesting those measures to set out the reasons why the request could not have been made earlier.

(see para. 132)