Case C-454/11: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās Tiesas Senāts — Latvia) — Gunārs Pusts v Lauku atbalsta dienests (Agriculture — EAGGF — Regulations (EC) No 1257/1999 and No 817/2004 — Support for rural development — Recovery of undue payments — National rules making the grant of agri-environmental aid subject to an annual application accompanied by specific documents — Beneficiary who has complied with his obligations regarding use of the area concerned but who has not submitted an application in accordance with those rules — Withdrawal of the aid, without consulting the beneficiary, in the event of failure by the latter to comply with the provisions applicable to the submission of an application for agri-environmental aid)
Date: 2013-02-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EAGGF, Latvia, administrative formalities, aid to agriculture, area of holding, interpretation of the law, reimbursement of aid, rural development








C_2013108EN.01000301.xml










13.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/3





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās Tiesas Senāts — Latvia) — Gunārs Pusts v Lauku atbalsta dienests
(Case C-454/11) (1)

(Agriculture - EAGGF - Regulations (EC) No 1257/1999 and No 817/2004 - Support for rural development - Recovery of undue payments - National rules making the grant of agri-environmental aid subject to an annual application accompanied by specific documents - Beneficiary who has complied with his obligations regarding use of the area concerned but who has not submitted an application in accordance with those rules - Withdrawal of the aid, without consulting the beneficiary, in the event of failure by the latter to comply with the provisions applicable to the submission of an application for agri-environmental aid)
2013/C 108/04
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākās Tiesas Senāts

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Gunārs Pusts

Respondent: Lauku atbalsta dienests

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Augstākās tiesas Senāts — Interpretation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations (OJ 1999 L 160, p. 80) and of Commission Regulation (EC) No 817/2004 of 29 April 2004 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 (OJ 2004 L 153, p. 30) — Agri-environmental aid and area aid — Recovery of undue payments — National rule making the grant of area aid subject to an annual application accompanied by specific documents — Beneficiary who has fulfilled his obligations regarding use of the area concerned but has submitted incomplete applications — Withdrawal of aid, without consulting the beneficiary, in the event of failure by the latter to observe provisions applicable to the submission of an application

Operative part of the judgment

Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain regulations, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1783/2003 of 29 September 2003, Commission Regulation (EC) No 817/2004 of 29 April 2004 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999, and 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 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers must be interpreted as not precluding national rules according to which the beneficiary of aid granted in return for his agri-environmental commitments covering several years is required to repay all of the aid already received in respect of previous years on the ground that he did not submit an annual application in accordance with the applicable national provisions, where that beneficiary claims that he continued to fulfil his obligations regarding the use of the areas concerned, he was not given the opportunity to be heard by the competent authority, but it is no longer possible to carry out an on-the-spot check of the areas concerned because the year at issue has elapsed.


(1)  OJ C 331, 12.11.2011.