THAN WOULD BE POSSIBLE UNDER ARTICLE 3 B ( 5 ) OF REGULATION NO 516/77 , WHICH MAKES PAYMENT OF SUCH AID CONDITIONAL ON VERIFICATION OF DUE PAYMENT OF THE MINIMUM PRICE TO THE PRODUCERS . THUS , IN THE COMMISSION ' S VIEW , THE NATIONAL AID IN QUESTION ENABLES RECIPIENTS TO ASSERT THEIR RIGHT TO THE COMMUNITY AID EARLIER .
37 IN THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT ' S VIEW , THE CONTESTED MEASURE IS INTENDED TO FACILITATE ACCESS TO AGRICULTURAL LOANS AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AID SUPPLEMENTING THE COMMUNITY MEASURES .
38 AS REGARDS THE COMMISSION ' S FIRST ARGUMENT , IT HAS FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE , EITHER IN THE WRITTEN STATEMENTS WHICH IT HAS SUBMITTED TO THE COURT OR AT THE HEARING , WHY PAYMENT OF THE PURCHASE PRICE OF TOMATOES TO PRODUCERS WITHIN FIVE DAYS AFTER DELIVERY OF THE PRODUCT CONSTITUTES A MEASURE WHICH IS CAPABLE OF DISTORTING TRADE AND ENCOURAGING THE PRODUCTION OF TOMATOES .
39 AS REGARDS THE SECOND ARGUMENT ADVANCED BY THE COMMISSION , IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT ARTICLE 3 B ( 5 ) OF REGULATION NO 516/77 LAYS DOWN THREE CONDITIONS FOR PAYMENT OF THE COMMUNITY AID TO THOSE CONCERNED :
( A ) PRODUCERS MUST HAVE BEEN PAID THE MINIMUM PRICE ;
( B)THE PRODUCTS MUST HAVE BEEN PROCESSED ; AND
( C)PRODUCTS AFTER PROCESSING MUST COMPLY WITH THE QUALITY STANDARDS IN FORCE .
THE COMMISSION DOES NOT EXPLAIN HOW , NOTWITHSTANDING THE THREE CONDITIONS REQUIRED , COMPLIANCE WITH ONE CONDITION ALONE , NAMELY VERIFICATION OF DUE PAYMENT OF THE MINIMUM PRICES , CAN ENTITLE THE CANNING UNDERTAKING CONCERNED TO PAYMENT OF THE COMMUNITY AID .
40 CONSEQUENTLY , THE ARGUMENTS PUT FORWARD BY THE COMMISSION CANNOT BE ACCEPTED . THIS PART OF THE APPLICATION MUST THEREFORE BE DISMISSED .
COMPATIBILITY OF ARTICLE 12 OF REGIONAL LAW NO 83/80 WITH REGULATION NO 1035/72
41 ARTICLE 12 OF REGIONAL LAW NO 83/80 GRANTS TO CITRUS-FRUIT PRODUCERS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF COOPERATIVES AND TO ASSOCIATIONS THE CONTRIBUTIONS PROVIDED FOR BY REGIONAL LAW NO 24 OF 3 JUNE 1975 , AS SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED . ACCORDING TO THE COMMISSION , THAT MEASURE CONSTITUTES AID CONTRARY TO THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN FRUIT AND VEGETABLES , ESTABLISHED BY REGULATION NO 1035/72 .
42 THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT CONSIDERS THAT THE MEASURE IS DESIGNED TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COOPERATIVE MOVEMENT .
43 THE COMMISSION HAS OMITTED TO EXPLAIN - AND HAS NOT EVEN SUBMITTED THE COMPLETE TEXT OF THE PROVISIONS TO WHICH THE CONTESTED ARTICLE REFERS - THE NATURE OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS PROVIDED FOR BY THE ARTICLE AND WHY THEY ARE CONSIDERED EQUIVALENT TO AID . FURTHERMORE , THE COMMISSION HAS ALSO FAILED TO IDENTIFY THE PROVISIONS OF REGULATION NO 1035/72 WITH WHICH THE CONTESTED ARTICLE IS ALLEGED TO BE COMPATIBLE .
44 THEREFORE , IRRESPECTIVE OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT , WHICH IS EQUALLY CONCISE , THIS PART OF THE APPLICATION CANNOT BE UPHELD .
COMPATIBILITY OF ARTICLES 15 AND