Case C-34/05: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven by decision of that court of 26 January 2005 in the case of Maatschap J. and G.P. and A.C. Schouten v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit
Date: 2005-04-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid to agriculture, area of holding, flood, fodder-growing, interpretation of the law, utilised agricultural area

16.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/7

(c) If the answer to Question 2b means that individuals can

rely on Article 11(1) of Directive 85/511/EEC:

What legal consequences must be attached to a finding
of the presence of FMD by a laboratory which is not
listed in Annex B to Directive 85/511/EEC?

3. Must Annex B to Directive 85/511/EEC be interpreted,
having regard to Articles 11 and 13 thereof, as meaning
that the mention in Annex B to Directive 85/511/EEC of
‘Centraal Diergeneeskundig Instituut, Lelystad’ can or must
refer also to ID-Lelystad B.V.?

4. If it follows from the above answers that the presence of
FMD can be found by a laboratory which is not listed in
Annex B to Directive 85/511/EEC or that Annex B to Direc-
tive 85/511/EEC must be interpreted as meaning that the
mention of
Instituut,
Lelystad’ can or must refer also to ID-Lelystad B.V.:

‘Centraal Diergeneeskundig

the

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van
Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven by decision of that court of
26 January 2005 in the case of Maatschap J. and G.P. and
A.C. Schouten v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voed-
selkwaliteit

(Case C-34/05)

(2005/C 93/13)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

Must Directive 85/511/EEC be interpreted as providing that
the national administrative authority authorised to adopt
decisions is bound by the outcome of an examination by a
laboratory which is
listed in Annex B to Directive
85/551/EEC or – if the answer to Question 2a means that
the administrative authority may base its FMD control
measures also on results obtained by a laboratory which is
not listed in Annex B to Directive 85/511/EEC – by the
results of the latter laboratory, or does the determination of
final authority in that regard fall within the procedural
autonomy of the Member State and must the court before
which the main proceedings are pending examine whether
the rules in that respect apply irrespective of whether the
laboratory examination is carried out by virtue of a Com-
munity or national legal obligation and of whether or not
the application of the provisions of national procedural law
renders the implementation of the Community rules extre-
mely difficult or practically impossible?

5. If the answer to Question 4 means that the issue of whether
national authorities are bound by the laboratory result is
governed by Directive 85/511/EEC:

Are the national authorities bound unconditionally by the
result of an FMD examination carried out by a laboratory? If
not, what margin of discretion does Directive 85/511/EEC
leave these national authorities?

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by decision of the College van Beroep voor
het Bedrijfsleven (Administrative Court for Trade and Industry)
(Netherlands) of 26 January 2005,
the Court
Registry on 31 January 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the
proceedings between Maatschap J. and G.P. and A.C. Schouten
and Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit on the
following questions:

received at

1. Must Article 12(2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 (1)
and Article 2(1)(c) of Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92 (2) be
interpreted as meaning that a parcel of land declared as a
forage area may not be regarded as ‘available’ if at any time
in the relevant period that parcel of land has been under
water?

2. If the answer to Question 1 is affirmative, are the provisions
referred to above binding with specific regard to the conse-
quences flowing from such reply?

3. If the answer to Question 1 is negative, what are the applic-
able criteria for determining whether a parcel of
land
declared as a forage area which was temporarily under
water can be regarded as ‘available’ for the purposes of
Article 12(2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 and
Article 2(1)(c) of Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92?

(1) Council Directive 85/511/EEC of 18 November 1985 introducing
Community measures for the control of foot-and-mouth disease (OJ
1985 L 315, p. 11).

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 (OJ L 160,

p. 21).

(2) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92 of 23 December 1992

(OJ L 391, p. 36).