Porcellino Grasso SRL v Ministerul Agriculturii şi Dezvoltării Rurale and Others.
| Jurisdiction | European Union |
| Court | Court of Justice (European Union) |
| Writing for the Court | Kumin |
| ECLI | ECLI:EU:C:2025:198 |
| Docket Number | C-116/24 |
| Date | 20 March 2025 |
| Procedure Type | Reference for a preliminary ruling |
Provisional text
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber)
20 March 2025 (*)
( Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common agricultural policy – European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) funding – National Rural Development Programme 2007-2013 – Rural development measure – Animal welfare payments – Calculation errors – Reduction of those payments by national authorities without waiting for a definitive decision by the European Commission – Impact of the expiry of the prescribed deadline for amending that programme, and Commission decisions approving or amending that programme – No contradiction between a judgment of the Court of Justice and a judgment of the General Court of the European Union – Liability of the Member State concerned for infringement of EU law )
In Case C‑116/24,
REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Curtea de Apel Piteşti (Court of Appeal, Piteşti, Romania), made by decision of 28 November 2023, received at the Court on 12 February 2024, in the proceedings
Porcellino Grasso SRL
v
Ministerul Agriculturii şi Dezvoltării Rurale,
Agenţia pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale,
Agenţia de Plăţi şi Intervenţie pentru Agricultură,
Agenţia de Plăţi şi Intervenţie pentru Agricultură – Centrul Judeţean Vâlcea,
THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),
composed of A. Kumin (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, F. Biltgen, President of the First Chamber, and I. Ziemele, Judge,
Advocate General: D. Spielmann,
Registrar: A. Calot Escobar,
having regard to the written procedure,
after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:
– Porcellino Grasso SRL, by C.S. Strătulă and O. Strătulă, avocaţi,
– the Ministerul Agriculturii şi Dezvoltării Rurale, by F.I. Barbu and A. Popescu, acting as Agents,
– the Romanian Government, by R. Antonie, E. Gane and A. Rotăreanu, acting as Agents,
– the European Commission, by L. Radu Bouyon and M. Salyková, acting as Agents,
having decided, after hearing the Advocate General, to proceed to judgment without an Opinion,
gives the following
Judgment
1 This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Articles 288, 291 and 297 TFEU, of the principle of EU law under which a decision of the European Commission produces legal effects until it is annulled, of Articles 18 and 19 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2005 L 277, p. 1), as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 74/2009 of 19 January 2009 (OJ 2009 L 30, p. 100) (‘Regulation No 1698/2005’), and of Article 9(3) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1974/2006 of 15 December 2006 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2006 L 368, p. 15), as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 335/2013 of 12 April 2013 (OJ 2013 L 105, p. 1) (‘Regulation No 1974/2006’).
2 The request has been made in proceedings between Porcellino Grasso SRL and the Ministerul Agriculturii şi Dezvoltării Rurale (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Romania), the Agenția pentru Finanțarea Investițiilor Rurale (Agency for the Financing of Rural Investments, Romania), the Agenția de Plăți și Intervenție pentru Agricultură (Agency for Payments and Intervention in Agriculture, Romania) and the Agenția de Plăți și Intervenție pentru Agricultură – Centrul Județean Vâlcea (Agency for Payments and Intervention in Agriculture – Vâlcea District Centre, Romania) (‘the APIA Vâlcea’) concerning a reduction in animal welfare payments.
Legal context
3 Article 18 of Regulation No 1698/2005, entitled ‘Preparation and approval’, provided:
‘1. Rural development programmes shall be established by a Member State following close cooperation with the partners referred to in Article 6.
2. Member States shall submit to the Commission a proposal for each rural development programme, containing the information mentioned in Article 16.
3. The Commission shall assess the proposed programmes on the basis of their consistency with the Community strategic guidelines, the national strategy plan and this Regulation.
Where the Commission considers that a rural development programme is not consistent with the Community strategic guidelines, the national strategy plan or this Regulation, it shall request the Member State to revise the proposed programme accordingly.
4. Each rural development programme shall be approved in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 90(2).’
4 Article 19 of that regulation, entitled ‘Review’, provided:
‘1. The rural development programmes shall be re-examined and, if appropriate, adapted for the remainder of the period by the Member State following Monitoring Committee approval. The revisions shall take into account the outcome of evaluations and the Commission’s reports, particularly with a view to strengthening or adapting the way in which the Community priorities are taken into account.
2. The Commission shall adopt a decision on requests to revise rural development programmes after the submission of such a request by a Member State in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 90(2). Changes requiring approval by Commission decision shall be defined in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 90(2).’
5 Article 40 of that regulation, entitled ‘Animal welfare payments’, stated:
‘1. Animal welfare payments provided for in Article 36(a)(v) shall be granted to farmers who make on a voluntary basis animal welfare commitments.
2. Animal welfare payments cover only those commitments going beyond the relevant mandatory standards established pursuant to Article 4 of and Annex III to [Council] Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 [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 (OJ 2003 L 270, p. 1)] and other relevant mandatory requirements established by national legislation and identified in the programme.
These commitments shall be undertaken as a general rule for a period between five and seven years. Where necessary and justified, a longer period shall be determined according to the procedure referred to in Article 90(2) for particular types of commitments.
3. The payments shall be granted annually and shall cover additional costs and income foregone resulting from the commitment made. Where necessary, they may cover also transaction cost.
Support shall be limited to the maximum amount laid down in Annex I.’
6 Article 6(1) of Regulation No 1974/2006 provided:
‘Changes in rural development programmes shall fall under the following categories:
(a) revisions as referred to in Article 19(1) of Regulation [No 1698/2005];
(b) revisions stemming from coordination procedures for the uptake of the financial resources as referred to in Article 77(3) of Regulation [No 1698/2005];
(ba) changes to the financing plan related to the implementation of Article 70(4b) of Regulation [No 1698/2005];
(c) other changes not covered by points (a), (b) and (ba) of this paragraph.’
7 According to Article 9(1) to (3) of that regulation:
‘1. Changes in programmes by Member States as referred to in Article 6(1)(c) may involve changes of financial breakdowns by measure within an axis as well as non-financial changes concerning the introduction of new measures and types of operations, the withdrawal of existing measures and types of operations, the changes relating to the exception referred to in Article 5(6) of Regulation [No 1698/2005] or information on and description of existing measures in the programme.
2. Member States shall also be authorised to make changes as referred to in Article 6(1)(c) by transferring within a calendar year from and to any axis up to 3% of the total EAFRD contribution to the programme for the entire programming period.
3. Programme changes referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 may be made before 31 December 2015 at the latest, provided that Member States notify such changes by 31 August 2015 at the latest.’
8 Article 5 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 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, and corrigendum OJ 2016 L 130, p. 13), entitled ‘EAFRD expenditure’, provides:
‘The EAFRD shall be implemented in shared management between the Member States and the [European] Union. It shall finance the Union’s financial contribution to rural development programmes implemented in accordance with the Union law on support for rural development.’
9 Article 52 of that regulation, entitled ‘Conformity clearance’, provides, in paragraph 1:
‘Where it finds that expenditure falling within the scope of Article 4(1) and Article 5 has not been effected in conformity with Union law and, in respect of the EAFRD, has not been effected in conformity with the applicable Union and national law referred to in Article 85 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 [of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
OB v Procura della Repubblica presso il Tribunale di Bologna.
...(sentencias de 28 de noviembre de 2000, Roquette Frères, C‑88/99, EU:C:2000:652, apartado 18, y de 20 de marzo de 2025, Porcellino Grasso, C‑116/24, EU:C:2025:198, apartado 34). Además, el Tribunal de Justicia puede verse obligado a tomar en consideración normas del Derecho de la Unión a la......