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 62022CN0635

    Case C-635/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Timişoara (Romania) lodged on 11 October 2022 — SC Assofrutti Rom SRL v Agenţia pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale and Centrul Regional pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale 5 Vest Timişoara

    OJ C 24, 23.1.2023, p. 28–28 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    23.1.2023   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 24/28

    Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Timişoara (Romania) lodged on 11 October 2022 — SC Assofrutti Rom SRL v Agenţia pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale and Centrul Regional pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale 5 Vest Timişoara

    (Case C-635/22)

    (2023/C 24/36)

    Language of the case: Romanian

    Referring court

    Curtea de Apel Timişoara

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Appellant and applicant at first instance: SC Assofrutti Rom SRL

    Respondents and defendants at first instance: Agenţia pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale and Centrul Regional pentru Finanţarea Investiţiilor Rurale 5 Vest Timişoara

    Questions referred

    1.

    Can the provisions of Article 17 of Council Directive 2008/90/EC of 29 September 2008 on the marketing of fruit plant propagating material and fruit plants intended for fruit production (1) be interpreted as prohibiting Member States from requiring the public procurement procedure to be conducted prior to the marketing of [Conformitas Agraria Communitatis (CAC)] material?

    2.

    In a situation such as that in the present case, can Article 4(10) of Regulation No 1303/2013, (2) read in conjunction with Article 39(1)(a) and (b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, be interpreted as precluding the requirement for the public procurement procedure to be conducted as provided for in [Romania’s National Rural Development Programme] 2014-2020 (fifth version)?

    (1)  OJ 2008 L 267, p. 8.

    (2)  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 Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 320).

    Top