Case C-173/02: Action brought on 13 May 2002 by the Kingdom of Spain against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2002-07-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU aid, European Commission, Spain, action for annulment (EU), agricultural levy, common organisation of markets, dairy production

13.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 169/21

Action brought on 13 May 2002 by the Kingdom of Spain
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-173/02)

(2002/C 169/37)

to gain access to an additional quota which it would be
impossible to finance in full (by means of an allocation free of
charge), given the limited funds available. Finally, the aid
granted does not, and cannot, affect either prices or the total
quantities produced.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 of 28 December 1992
establishing an additional levy in the milk and milk products
sector, amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1256/1999 of
17 May 1999 (OJ L 160 of 16.6.1999, p. 73).

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 13 May 2002 by the Kingdom of Spain
represented by S. Ortiz Vaamonde, Abogado del Estado, with
an address for service in Luxembourg at the Spanish Embassy,
4-6 Boulevard Emmanuel Servais.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the Commission’s decision of 12 March 2002
declaring the aid paid to producers of cows’ milk for the
purchase of reference quantities incompatible with the
common market and ordering it to be repaid; and

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Infringement of Articles 87 EC and 88 EC in that the measure
at
issue is protected by the regulation on the common
organisation of the market (COM) in milk and milk products.
The measures at issue cannot be challenged as contrary to the
COM in a case in which the latter specifically provides for
mechanisms comparable to those adopted and which are
directed to the same end. The aid granted is not intended to
cover operating costs but is granted in respect of a production
right, which is a capital asset of the agricultural holding itself.
The aid is consonant with the objectives laid down in the rules
establishing the additional levy, namely the restructuring of
the milk sector, given that its aim is to improve production
structures in the dairy sector, which is fundamental to the
regional economy of Asturias. The fact that it does not exactly
coincide with the mechanism provided for in the COM does
not render it contrary to the scheme, since the degree of
intervention involved is less than that provided for and
authorised.
Instead of allocating quotas free of charge as
provided for in the first indent of Article 8 of Regulation (EEC)
No 3950/92 (1), the Asturian authorities are making more
efficient use of public resources, enabling a group of farmers

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hoge Raad der
Nederlanden by judgment of that Court of 8 March 2002
in the appeal brought by Streekgewest Westelijk Noord-
Brabant and Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-174/02)

(2002/C 169/38)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of the Hoge Raad der
Nederlanden (Supreme Court of the Netherlands) of 8 March
2002, received at the Court Registry on 10 May 2002, for a
preliminary ruling in the appeal brought by Streekgewest
Westelijk Noord-Brabant and Staatssecretaris van Financiën,
on the following questions:

1. May only an individual who is affected by a distortion of
cross-border competition as a result of an aid measure
rely on the last sentence of Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty
(now the last sentence of Article 88(3) EC)?

2. Where an aid measure within the meaning of the last
sentence of Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty (now the last
sentence of Article 88(3) EC) consists of an exemption
from a tax (which is to be construed as also meaning a
reduction in or relief on such tax) whose proceeds are
paid into the public coffers, and no provision in that
respect is made for suspending the exemption pending
the notification procedure, must that tax be regarded as
part of that aid measure, by virtue of the very fact that
the levying of the tax on persons who do not enjoy an
exemption is the means whereby a favourable effect is
produced, so that as long as the implementation of that
aid measure is not permitted under the abovementioned
provision, the prohibition laid down therein is also
applicable to (the levying of) that tax?