Case C-446/06: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 February 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven, Netherlands) — A.G. Winkel v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit (Beef and veal — Common organisation of the markets — Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 — Article 3(f) — Grant of a suckler cow premium — Conditions consistent with usual animal husbandry practice)
Date: 2008-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: agricultural guidance, beef, interpretation of the law, livestock farming, regulation of agricultural production, suckler cow

26.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/5

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Rüdiger Jager

Defendant: Amt für Landwirtschaft Bützow

Re:

the European Communities'

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgericht
Schwerin — Interpretation of Article 2(2) of Council Regulation
(EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the
protection of
interests
(OJ 1995 L 312, p. 1) — Refusal of an application for livestock
aid on account of a discrepancy of more than 20 % found
between the number of animals declared and the number estab-
lished during a check — Retroactive application of subsequent
less severe administrative penalties concerning livestock aid
which applied only after the abolition of
the livestock aid
scheme in the Member State concerned

financial

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 February
2008 (reference for
a preliminary ruling from the
College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven, Netherlands) —
A.G. Winkel v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en
Voedselkwaliteit

(Case C-446/06) (1)

(Beef and veal — Common organisation of the markets —
Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 — Article 3(f) — Grant of a
suckler cow premium — Conditions consistent with usual
animal husbandry practice)

(2008/C 107/07)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: A.G. Winkel

Defendants: Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit

Operative part of the judgment

Re:

The second sentence of Article 2(2) of Council Regulation (EC,
Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of
the European Communities' financial interests is to be interpreted as
meaning that the provisions laid down by Articles 66 and 67 of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 of 21 April 2004
laying down detailed rules for the implementation of cross compliance,
modulation and the integrated administration and control system
provided for
in Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of
29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support
schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain
support schemes for farmers, as amended and corrected by Commission
Regulation (EC) No 239/2005 of 11 February 2005, may not be
applied retroactively to an application for ‘livestock’ aid falling within
the
of Commission Regulation (EEC)
No 3887/92 of 23 December 1992 laying down detailed rules for
applying the integrated administration and control system for certain
Community aid schemes, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC)
No 2801/1999 of 21 December 1999, which gave rise to an exclu-
sion from the benefit of aid under Article 10c of that regulation.

temporis

ratione

scope

Reference for a preliminary ruling — College van Beroep voor
het bedrijfsleven — Interpretation of Article 3(f) of Council
Regulation (EC) No 1254 of 17 May 1999 on the common
organisation of the market in beef and veal (OJ L 1999 L 160,
p. 21) — Compatibility of national legislation which makes the
award of a suckler-cow premium subject to conditions corre-
sponding to a usual animal husbandry practice

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3(f) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May
1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal, as
amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1512/2001 of 23 July
2001, does not preclude national rules which make the right to a
suckler cow premium subject to conditions consistent with usual animal
husbandry practice that require, first, a certain frequency of calving and
secondly, that the calf should have been suckled by its mother for a
period of four months after its birth.

(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.

(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.