Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62018CN0814

    Case C-814/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands) lodged on 21 December 2018 — Ursa Major Services B.V. v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit

    OJ C 122, 1.4.2019, p. 9–9 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    21/12/2018
    Date lodged:
    21/12/2018
    Author:
    Court of Justice
    Form:
    Judicial information
    Authentic language:
    Dutch
    Type of procedure:
    Reference for a preliminary ruling
    Link
    Select all documents mentioning this document
    Case affecting:
    • Submits a preliminary question about 32006R1198 article 55 paragraph 1
    Link

    1.4.2019   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 122/9

    Request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands) lodged on 21 December 2018 — Ursa Major Services B.V. v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit

    (Case C-814/18)

    (2019/C 122/10)

    Language of the case: Dutch

    Referring court

    College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicant: Ursa Major Services B.V.

    Defendant: Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit

    Questions referred

    1.

    Is Article 55(1) of Regulation 1198/2006 (1) applicable to the relationship between the provider of a subsidy, in the present case the Minister, and the beneficiary (the recipient of the subsidy)?

    2.

    If the first question is answered to the effect that Article 55(1) of Regulation 1198/2006 does apply to the relationship between the provider of the subsidy and the beneficiary: can expenditure that has been paid by a third party (whether or not by set-off) be regarded as expenditure actually paid by the beneficiary as referred to in Article 55(1) of Regulation 1198/2006?

    3.

    If the second question is answered to the effect that expenditure paid by a third party (whether or not by set-off) cannot be regarded as expenditure actually paid by the beneficiary as referred to in Article 55(1) of Regulation 1198/2006:

    (a)

    does an executive practice whereby the provider of the subsidy has consistently considered contributions from third parties to be expenditure actually paid by the beneficiary as referred to in Article 55(1) of Regulation 1198/2006 mean that the beneficiary could not have been expected to detect such an incorrect interpretation of Article 55(1) of Regulation 1198/2006 by the provider of the subsidy, with the result that the beneficiary is entitled to the subsidy as granted to him, and

    (b)

    should the contributions from third parties then be included in the expenditure actually paid by the beneficiary as referred to in Article 55(1) of Regulation 1198/2006 (in which case the subsidy is set higher) or

    (c)

    should recovery of the wrongly granted subsidy then be waived on the basis of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations and/or the principle of legal certainty?

    (d)

    does it make any difference in that regard if the provider of the subsidy, as in the present case, has granted an advance on the subsidy?

    (1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 of 27 July 2006 on the European Fisheries Fund (OJ 2006 L 223, p. 1).

    Top