Case C-714/23, Benediktinerabtei Ettal: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Tirol (Austria) lodged on 23 November 2023 — Benediktinerabtei Ettal
Date: 2023-11-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: agricultural land, collaborative economy, farmer, free movement of capital, land governance, sustainable agriculture, tenant farming, transfer of property, utilised agricultural area








C_202401839EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/1839


11.3.2024





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Tirol (Austria) lodged on 23 November 2023 — Benediktinerabtei Ettal
(Case C-714/23, Benediktinerabtei Ettal)
(C/2024/1839)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesverwaltungsgericht Tirol

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Benediktinerabtei Ettal

Respondent authority: Bezirkshauptmannschaft Innsbruck

In the presence of: Benediktinerinnen Kloster St Nikolaus von Flüe

Questions referred







1.




Must Article 63 TFEU be interpreted
 as precluding a provision of national law, such as Paragraph 6(3) of the Tiroler Grundverkehrsgesetz 1996 (Tyrol Law on the transfer of land; ‘the TGVG 1996’), (1) under which the acquisition of rights in agricultural land by a farmer within the meaning of Paragraph 2(5)(a) is only to be authorised by the land transfer authority if the acquisition of rights is not contrary to the principles set out in Paragraph 1(1)(a) and the acquirer of rights shows that he or she is co-farming the agricultural land in a sustainable and proper manner as part of his or her establishment?










2.




If the answer to this question is in the affirmative:
 Does an objectively comparable situation exist between, on the one hand, a farmer whose agricultural establishment is located in close proximity to the land being acquired and who intends to co-farm that land as part of his or her establishment, and, on the other, a farmer whose agricultural establishment is not located in (in agricultural terms reasonable) close proximity to the land being acquired and who does not intend to co-farm that land as part of his or her establishment in order to contribute to the maintenance of his or her establishment, but who leaves the land concerned to local farmers to farm under a lease or, for an indefinite period, under precaria, in which case the authorisation of the land transfer authority would have to be refused under national law?










2








a.




If the answer to this question is in the affirmative:
 Does the justification of the creation, preservation or strengthening of effective agricultural or forestry establishments apply in respect of the restriction of the free movement of capital since Paragraphs 6, 7 and 7a of the TGVG 1996 are aimed at ensuring that agricultural land is farmed in a sustainable manner and in accordance with its purpose by farmers as part of their establishment in order to strengthen agricultural establishments and prevent the fragmentation and inappropriate use of farmland?










(1)  Tiroler Grundverkehrsgesetz 1996 (Tyrol Law on the transfer of land 1996) (LGBI. No. 61/1996, last amended by LGBI. No. 204/2021).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1839/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)