1 BY JUDGMENT OF 7 JULY 1976 , RECEIVED AT THE COURT ON 25 AUGUST 1976 , THE TRIBUNAL ADMINISTRATIF , RENNES , PUT TO THE COURT THREE QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE INTERPRETATION OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2195/69 OF THE COMMISSION OF 4 NOVEMBER 1969 ESTABLISHING METHODS OF GIVING EFFECT TO THE SYSTEM OF PREMIUMS FOR WITHHOLDING MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS FROM THE MARKET ( JO 1969 , L 278 , P . 6 ).
2 THOSE QUESTIONS AROSE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A DISPUTE BETWEEN A FARMER AND THE COMPETENT NATIONAL AUTHORITY OVER THE QUESTION WHETHER THE LATTER ' S DECISION TO RECOVER A PART OF THE PREMIUM WHICH IT HAD PAID TO THE FARMER WAS LAWFUL .
3 THE SECOND SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 8 ( 2 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1975/69 OF THE COUNCIL OF 6 OCTOBER 1969 ( OJ , ENGLISH SPECIAL EDITION , SECOND SERIES , III , P . 38 ), WHICH INTRODUCES THAT SYSTEM PROVIDES THAT THE PREMIUM SHALL ONLY BE PAID IF , IN ADDITION TO SATISFYING OTHER CONDITIONS , THE PERSON RECEIVING THE PREMIUM HAS ON HIS FARM A NUMBER OF ADULT BOVINE UNITS NOT LESS THAN THE NUMBER OF DAIRY COWS HELD AT THE DATE OF MAKING THE APPLICATION FOR THE PREMIUM .
4 THE FILE SHOWS THAT THE COMPETENT NATIONAL AUTHORITY ADOPTED THE DECISION IN QUESTION AS A RESULT OF TWO INSPECTIONS SHOWING THAT THE FARMER DID NOT KEEP ON HIS FARM THE NUMBER OF ADULT BOVINE UNITS REQUIRED BY THE SAID SECOND SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 8 ( 2 ) OF REGULATION NO 1975/69 , AS DEFINED IN ARTICLES 1 AND 2 OF REGULATION NO 2195/69 .
5 THE FIRST QUESTION ASKS THE COURT TO RULE WHETHER ARTICLE 2 OF REGULATION NO 2195/69 PERMITS THE CATTLE ON THE FARM TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN PROPORTION TO THE TIME FOR WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN THERE .
6 THE SECOND QUESTION ASKS WHETHER , IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH THE RATE OF CONVERSION , ACCOUNT MUST BE TAKEN OF THE AGE OF THE CATTLE AT THE DATE OF THE INSPECTION OR AT THE DATE ON WHICH THEY ARE MARKETED , IF THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE PREMIUM PRODUCES EVIDENCE THAT HIS CATTLE ARE MARKETED AFTER REACHING THE AGE OF FOUR MONTHS .
7 THE THIRD QUESTION ASKS WHETHER THE INTERPRETATION OF THE SAID REGULATION , IN PARTICULAR OF ARTICLE 2 THEREOF , REQUIRES OTHER DETAILS WHICH ARE NECESSARY FOR THE SOLUTION OF THE CASE .
8 IN REPLYING TO ALL THOSE QUESTIONS , ACCOUNT MUST BE TAKEN OF THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS IN THE BEEF AND VEAL SECTOR , AND , IN PARTICULAR , OF THE MEASURES TO IMPROVE STOCK BREEDING ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL IN ITS REGULATION NO 1975/69 .
9 ARTICLE 2 OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 805/68 OF THE COUNCIL OF 27 JUNE 1968 ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN BEEF AND VEAL ( OJ , ENGLISH SPECIAL EDITION , 1968 , I , P . 187 ) PROVIDES THAT COMMUNITY MEASURES TO IMPROVE STOCK BREEDING MAY BE ADOPTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 43 ( 2 ) OF THE EEC TREATY .
10 IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF MILK OFFERED FOR INTERVENTION AND , AT THE SAME TIME , TO INCREASE THE QUANTITY OF BEEF AND VEAL PRODUCED IN THE COMMUNITY , REGULATION NO 1975/69 ADOPTED IN 1969 PROVIDED FOR A PREMIUM FOR WITHHOLDING MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS FROM THE MARKET , TO BE GRANTED TO THOSE FARMERS WHO , SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS , DISCONTINUE FULLY AND FINALLY THE SALE OF THOSE PRODUCTS .
11 THE PURPOSE OF THAT PREMIUM WAS TO ENCOURAGE A TREND APPARENT AMONG CERTAIN FARMERS TO SUBSTITUTE THE PRODUCTION OF BEEF AND VEAL FOR THE MARKETING OF MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS .
12 FOR THAT REASON , AS STATED ABOVE , THE SECOND SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 8 ( 2 ) OF THAT REGULATION PROVIDES THAT THE GRANT OF THE PREMIUM SHALL INVOLVE AN OBLIGATION TO KEEP ON THE FARM A NUMBER OF ADULT BOVINE UNITS NOT LESS THAN THE NUMBER OF DAIRY COWS HELD AT THE DATE OF MAKING THE APPLICATION FOR THE PREMIUM .
13 IT MERGES FROM THE TENOR OF THE REGULATION AS A WHOLE THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE PREMIUM WAS NOT ONLY TO ENCOURAGE THE PERSON IN RECEIPT THEREOF TO USE HIS ENTIRE MILK PRODUCTION FOR REARING CATTLE INTENDED FOR THE PRODUCTION OF MEAT , BUT ALSO TO ENCOURAGE HIM TO ENSURE THAT HIS FARM IS EFFICIENTLY EXPLOITED .
14 ARTICLE 1 OF THE COMMISSION ' S IMPLEMENTING REGULATION NO 2195/69 , DEFINES THE TERM ' ADULT BOVINE UNIT ' AS ' AN ANIMAL OF THE DOMESTIC BOVINE SPECIES AGED AT LEAST 12 MONTHS ' , EXCLUDING COWS NOT YET HAVING CALVED AND INTENDED FOR MILK PRODUCTION .
15 UNDER ARTICLE 2 OF THAT REGULATION , FOR CALCULATING THE NUMBER OF ADULT BOVINE UNITS THE FOLLOWING RATES OF CONVERSION ARE TO BE APPLIED : ' ( A ) BOVINE ANIMALS OF LESS THAN 4 MONTHS : 0 ADULT BOVINE UNITS ; ( B ) BOVINE ANIMALS OF MORE THAN 4 MONTHS BUT LESS THAN 12 MONTHS : 0.4 ADULT BOVINE UNITS . '
16 AS ONE-HALF OF THE PREMIUM WAS TO BE PAID ON SIGNATURE OF THE UNDERTAKING TO CEASE SELLING MILK PRODUCTS , ARTICLE 15 PROVIDES FOR THE BALANCE TO BE PAID ANNUALLY IN FOUR EQUAL INSTALMENTS AND , AT THE LATEST , IN THE 15TH , 27TH , 39TH AND 51ST MONTHS FOLLOWING THE DATE OF THAT SIGNATURE .
17 UNDER THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 16 OF THE REGULATION IN QUESTION , IF THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE SUBSIDY HAS NOT SHOWN TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY THAT HE KEEPS THE REQUISITE NUMBER OF ADULT BOVINE UNITS , THE MEMBER STATES SHALL TAKE STEPS TO RECOVER THE FIRST HALF OF THE SUBSIDY .
18 THE EFFECT OF THE PROVISION IN ARTICLE 2 THAT CALVES OF LESS THAN 4 MONTHS SHALL BE COUNTED AS ' 0 ADULT BOVINE UNITS ' IS TO PREVENT FARMERS WHO REAR CALVES FOR SLAUGHTER WHICH ARE SOLD AT ABOUT THE AGE OF 4 MONTHS FROM RECEIVING THE PREMIUM .
19 A CONSIDERATION OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PROVISIONS IN QUESTION SHOWS THAT THE IMPORTANT FACTOR IN THE APPLICATION OF THE REGULATION IS NOT THE OCCASIONAL PRESENCE ON THE FARM OF THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF ADULT BOVINE UNITS BUT THE PRESENCE OF THAT NUMBER THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE OF THE REFERENCE YEAR .
20 IT IS FOR THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY TO ENSURE THAT , ON AVERAGE , THE NUMBER OF ADULT BOVINE UNITS REQUIRED BY REGULATION NO 1975/69 OF THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN KEPT THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE OF THE REFERENCE PERIOD .
21 THE USE OF THE EXPRESSION ' TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY ' IN ARTICLE 16 OF REGULATION NO 2195/69 ALLOWS THE AUTHORITY TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION AS REGARDS THE EVIDENCE WHICH MUST BE PROVIDED BY THE PERSON TO WHOM THE PREMIUM IS PAID .
22 IT FOLLOWS THAT WHEN THE ANNUAL INSPECTIONS ARE MADE THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY MUST VERIFY NOT ONLY THE NUMBER OF ANIMALS ACTUALLY KEPT ON THE FARM AT THAT DATE BUT ALSO EVERY FACTOR WHICH IS CAPABLE OF PROVIDING EVIDENCE OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE ANIMALS MARKETED BY THE FARMER AND THE LENGTH OF TIME FOR WHICH THEY WERE ON THE FARM .
23 NOTWITHSTANDING THE ELLIPTICAL TERMS OF ARTICLE 2 OF THE COMMISSION REGULATION , IT APPEARS THAT THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY MUST EXCLUDE FROM THE CALCULATION OF THE NUMBER OF ADULT BOVINE UNITS THE PERIOD DURING WHICH THE CALVES FOR SLAUGHTER WERE UNDER THE AGE OF 4 MONTHS .
24 THE REPLY TO BE GIVEN TO THE NATIONAL COURT MUST THEREFORE BE THAT ARTICLE 2 OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2195/69 REQUIRES THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY , IN CALCULATING THE NUMBER OF ADULT BOVINE UNITS ON A FARM , TO TAKE SUCH ANIMALS INTO ACCOUNT IN PROPORTION TO THE TIME FOR WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN THERE .
25 IN MAKING THAT CALCULATION THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY MUST EXCLUDE THE PERIOD DURING WHICH THE CATTLE WERE UNDER THE AGE OF 4 MONTHS .