Case C-684/13: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 2 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret — Denmark) — Johannes Demmer v Fødevareministeriets Klagecenter (References for a preliminary ruling — Agriculture — Common agricultural policy — Single payment scheme — Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 — Article 44(2) — Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 — Article 34(2)(a) — Concept of ‘eligible hectare’ — Areas surrounding runways, taxiways and stopways — Agricultural use — Lawfulness — Recovery of agricultural aid unduly allocated)
Date: 2015-07-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid per hectare, aid to agriculture, air safety, airport, land use, reimbursement of aid, single payment scheme, terms for aid








C_2015294EN.01000501.xml










7.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/5






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 2 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret — Denmark) — Johannes Demmer v Fødevareministeriets Klagecenter
(Case C-684/13) (1)

((References for a preliminary ruling - Agriculture - Common agricultural policy - Single payment scheme - Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 - Article 44(2) - Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 - Article 34(2)(a) - Concept of ‘eligible hectare’ - Areas surrounding runways, taxiways and stopways - Agricultural use - Lawfulness - Recovery of agricultural aid unduly allocated))
(2015/C 294/06)
Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Vestre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Johannes Demmer

Defendant: Fødevareministeriets Klagecenter

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 44(2) of Council Regulation No 1782/2003 (EC) of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999, (EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001, Articles 34(2)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation No 1782/2003, must be interpreted as meaning that an agricultural area made up of airfield safety areas surrounding runways, taxiways and stopways which are subject to specific rules and restrictions is an area eligible for the aid concerned, provided that: (i) the farmer using that area enjoys a sufficient degree of autonomy with regard to its use for the purposes of his or her agricultural activity; and (ii) the farmer is able to carry out the agricultural activity on that area despite restrictions arising from the pursuance of a non-agricultural activity on those same areas.










2.


Article 137 of Regulation No 73/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that a farmer who was informed prior to 1 January 2010 that payment entitlements were allocated to him or her unduly may not rely on that article for the purpose of having those entitlements regularised.
Article 73(4) of Commission Regulation 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 Regulation No 1782/2003, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2184/2005 of 23 December 2005, must be interpreted as meaning that a farmer ought reasonably to have detected as ineligible for aid areas in respect of whose use he or she has no discretion for the purpose of carrying out his or her agricultural activity and/or on which he or she is unable to carry out agricultural activity due to restrictions arising from the pursuance of a non-agricultural activity on those same areas. The relevant moment for assessing whether the error committed could reasonably be detected by that farmer is the time of the payment. The assessment under Article 73(4) of Regulation No 796/2004 must be conducted separately in respect of each of the years concerned.
Article 73(5) of Regulation No 796/2004, as amended by Regulation No 2184/2005, must be interpreted as meaning that, in circumstances such as those of the dispute in the main proceedings, a farmer must be regarded as having been in good faith if he or she sincerely believed that the areas concerned were eligible for aid. The assessment of that farmer’s good faith for the purposes of Article 73(5) of Regulation No 796/2004 must be conducted separately in respect of each of the years concerned and that good faith must continue until the end of the fourth year following the date of the payment of the aid.






(1)  
            OJ C 85, 22.3.2014.