Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 11 August 2022 — SB v Agrárminiszter

(Case C-538/22)

(2022/C 432/12)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SB

Defendant: Agrárminiszter

Questions referred

Is the practice of a Member State compliant with Article 30(3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 640/2014 of 11 March 2014 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the integrated administration and control system and conditions for refusal or withdrawal of payments and administrative penalties applicable to direct payments, rural development support and cross compliance, (1) having regard to recitals 28 and 31, points 16 and 18 of Article 2(1) and Article 31(1) to (3) thereof, if that practice establishes that where, under the aid eligibility criterion introduced by the Member State, the calving rate achieved for the number of declared animals is less than the rate required and stipulated for declared animals, the application for payment of coupled support for suckler cows must be refused in its entirety, even where the required calving rate is met by a smaller number of declared animals, because where the calving percentage is less than that required by the national legislation, the result is that none of the declared animals is eligible?

If the response to the previous question is in the negative, in the present case, where the calving percentage achieved is less than that required by the national legislation, having regard to the requirements for a graded and proportionate approach established in recitals 28 and 31 of the aforesaid regulation and the articles of EU law cited in the first question referred for a preliminary ruling, must the number of eligible animals within the meaning of point 18 of Article 2(1) and Article 30(3) of the regulation be determined:

(a)	by classing as eligible animals only those which have calved; or

(b)	by classing as eligible animals those animals from among the declared animals which comprise the group in which the calving rate stipulated in the national legislation is reached?

Having regard to Article 30(3) and Article 31(1) and (2) of Delegated Regulation No 640/2014 and the requirement for proportionality established in recital 31 thereof, must Article 31(3) of that regulation be interpreted as meaning that the penalty is to be determined on the basis of the ratio of the non-compliant to compliant animals, or on the basis of the ratio of the declared animals to the compliant animals, and also that the quotient thus obtained must still be multiplied by 100, in a percentage calculation?

(1) OJ 2014 L 181, p. 48.