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 62011CN0454

Case C-454/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Latvijas Republikas Augstākās tiesas Senāta Adminsitratīvo (Republic of Latvia) lodged on 1 September 2011 — Gunārs Pusts v Lauku atbalsta dienests

OJ C 331, 12.11.2011, p. 12–12 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

12.11.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 331/12

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Latvijas Republikas Augstākās tiesas Senāta Adminsitratīvo (Republic of Latvia) lodged on 1 September 2011 — Gunārs Pusts v Lauku atbalsta dienests

(Case C-454/11)

2011/C 331/19

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākās tiesas Senāts

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Gunārs Pusts

Defendant: Lauku atbalsta dienests

Questions referred

1.

Are the European Union rules governing repayment of aid to be understood to mean that payment of the aid may be considered undue in cases where, although the beneficiary of the aid continued to fulfil the undertakings, he did not comply with the established payment application procedure?

2.

Is a rule under which the undertakings made by the aid beneficiary are suspended, without giving the beneficiary of the aid the opportunity to be heard and where that suspension is deduced solely from the fact that an application has not been submitted, compatible with European Union law governing repayment of aid?

3.

Is a rule under which, where it is no longer possible to carry out a control in situ (because a year has elapsed) and where it is therefore deduced that the undertakings made by the beneficiary have been suspended, that beneficiary must repay the entire amount of the aid funds already paid during the commitment period, even if those funds have been granted and paid for several years, compatible with European Union law governing repayment of aid?
Top