CELEX: 62021CN0668
Language: en
Date: 2021-11-08 00:00:00
Title: Case C-668/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 8 November 2021 — SIA Druvnieks v Lauku atbalsta dienests

24.1.2022   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 37/18
            
         
      Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 8 November 2021 — SIA Druvnieks v Lauku atbalsta dienests
      (Case C-668/21)
      (2022/C 37/24)
      Language of the case: Latvian
      
         Referring court
      
      Augstākā tiesa (Senāts)
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant at first instance and appellant: SIA Druvnieks
      
         Other party in the appeal proceedings: Lauku atbalsta dienests
      
         Questions referred
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Is the application of Article 60 of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy justified where an undertaking owned by the proprietor of the company applying for aid, which is distinct from the latter, has committed an irregularity the financial consequences of which have not been rectified and the company applying for aid has taken over that undertaking’s agricultural business?
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Is it possible to apply Article 60 of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy in such a way that a person is found to have circumvented the administrative penalty provided for in Article 64(4)(d) of that regulation, despite the fact that, in respect of the applicant company or its proprietor, no decision has been adopted imposing on it an administrative penalty resulting in its exclusion from eligibility for the aid?
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Is it possible to apply Article 60 of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 in such a way that the authority responsible for examination of the project proposal must verify whether other undertakings previously owned by the proprietor of the company applying for aid satisfy the provisions of Article 2(14) of Commission Regulation (EU) No 702/2014 of 25 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and, if the conditions are not fulfilled, reject the project proposal without an additional individual assessment of the factual circumstances?
               
            
         (1)  Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 352/78, (EC) No 165/94, (EC) No 2799/98, (EC) No 814/2000, (EC) No 1290/2005 and (EC) No 485/2008 (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 549).
      
         (2)  OJ 2014 L 193, p. 1.