JUDGMENT OF 17.5.1972 — CASE 93/71 following the establishment of the require payment of the subsidy without proof of slaughter as provided in that Member State's being able to rely Article 10 of Regulation No 2195/69. on arguments based on any legislative As from that time, the abovementioned provisions or administrative practices to regulations give the farmer the right to withhold such payment. In Case 93/71 Reference to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by the Pretore di Lonato for a preliminary ruling in the action pending before that court between ORSOLINA LEONESIO, a farmer of Monica (province of Brescia, Italy), and Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry of the Italian Republic, on the interpretation — of Articles 1 to 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 1975/69 of the Council of 6 October 1969 establishing a system of subsidies particularly for slaughtering cows (JO L 252, p. 1); — of Articles 3 to 11 of Regulation (EEC) No 2195/69 of the Commission of 4 November 1969 adopting detailed rules for the application of that system (JO L 278, p. 6), THE COURT composed of: R. Lecourt, President, J. Mertens de Wilmars and H. Kutscher (Rapporteur), Presidents of Chambers, A. M. Donner, A. Trabucchi, R. Monaco and P. Pescatore, Judges, Advocate-General: K. Roemer Registrar: A. Van Houtte gives the following 288 LEONESIO v ITALIAN MINISTRY FOR AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY JUDGMENT Issues of fact and of law I — Facts and procedure Article 19 provides that the Member States shall be authorized within the limits set out The facts and procedure may be sum­ in that article to impose additional condi­ marized as follows: tions for the grant of the subsidy. 1. A. In accordance with its basic Regula­ tion No 805/68 of 27 June 1968 on the 2. By a circular of 23 March 1970 the common organization of the market in Italian Ministry for Agriculture and beef and veal (OJ English Special Edition Forestry gave to the regional authorities 1968(1), p. 187) the Council adopted on instructions relating to the rules for the 6 October 1969 Regulation No 1975/69, application of the said regulations, whilst Article 1 of which provides that 'Farmers stating that the actual implementation of having at least two milk cows may, on those regulations was subject to the adop­ application, receive a subsidy for slaughter­ tion of the necessary budgetary provisions and the administration could, in the mean­ ing on the conditions specified below', that is to say in Articles 2 to 4 of the same time, only issue 'provisional authorization' regulation. to slaughter. Under Article 9 the detailed rules for the In 1970 Mrs Leonesio, a farmer, slaugh­ tered five milk cows and sought from the application of the abovementioned article were to be established 'in accordance competent authorities of the province of with the procedure provided for in Article Brescia the grant of a subsidy of Lit. 625 000. In accordance with the above­ 27 of Regulation (EEC) No 805/68', that mentioned circular this subsidy was is to say, by the Commission acting on the opinion of the Management Committee. granted to her by way of a 'provisional Article 10 provides that 'The Member authorization' issued on 22 May 1970, States may be authorized, according to payment being subject 'to compliance with the technical conditions laid down' and the procedure laid down in Article 27 of Regulation (EEC) No 805/68, to impose 'the adoption by the Italian Parliament of additional conditions for the grant of the legislative provisions making the the subsidies necessary allocations'. Article 12(1) provides that 'The European At the beginning of November 1971, believing that she had complied with all Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guidance Section, shall reimburse the necessary conditions, Mrs Leonesio the Member States 50% of the subsidies'. brought an action before the Pretore, Lonato, under Articles 633 et seq. of the B. On 4 November 1969, the Commission, Italian Code of Civil Procedure for a on the basis of Regulation No 1975/69, decree of injunction ordering the Ministry adopted Regulation No 2195/69. for Agriculture and Forestry to pay the Articles 3 to 9 and 11 of that regulation subsidy. relate to the formalities to be completed both by the individual concerned and by 3. By an order of 3 November 1971, the the Community and the Member States Pretore di Lonato decided to ask the Court for slaughtering and payment of the of Justice: subsidy in each particular case. Article 10 provides that the payment of the '(a) Whether the provisions of Regulation subsidy 'shall take place within two months No 1975/69 and of Regulation No of the establishment of proof of the 2195/69 are directly applicable in the slaughtering in accordance with Article 9 Italian legal system and, if this ques­ of this regulation'. tion is answered in the affirmative, 289 JUDGMENT OF 17.5.1972 — CASE 93/71 whether they create individual rights Mrs Leonesio, the Italian Government and which national courts must protect ; the Commission presented oral argument at the hearing on 15 March 1972. (b) If the above question is answered in the Mrs Leonesio was represented by Cesare affirmative, whether, in view of the Trebeschi, Carlo Cappelli and Emilio provisions of Article 10 of Regulation Cappelli, of the Rome Bar, the Italian No 2195/69, the provisions of Articles Government by Adolfo Maresca, Minister 1 to 4 of Regulation No 1975/69 and Plenipotentiary, assisted by Giorgio Zagari, of Articles 3 to 11 of Regulation No Deputy State Advocate-General and the 2195/69 must be interpreted as mean­ Commission by its Legal Adviser, Armando ing that they have created individual Toledano-Laredo. pecuniary rights immediately enforce­ The Advocate-General delivered his able against the State such that opinion at the hearing on 26 April 1972. national legislation can have no influ­ ence whatever as to the period for pay­ ment and whether consequently this II — Observations submitted in ac­ pecuniary right cannot be made cordance with Article 20 of subject to certain conditions but must the Protocol on the Statute of be afforded immediate protection by the Court of Justice of the the national court where: EEC — in application of Article 5(1) of The observations submitted in accordance Regulation No 2195/69 it has been with Article 20 of the Protocol on the established that applications for the. Statute of the Court of Justice of the EEC grant of the slaughtering subsidy may be summarized as follows: may be allowed to proceed (this finding having been made in the Mrs Leonesio states that the provisions of prescribed manner on 26 January Regulations Nos 1975/69 and 2195/69 1970 by Regulation (EEC) No providing for the grant of slaughtering 140/70 of the Commission pub­ subsidies are of à 'legally perfect' nature lished in the JO L 20, of 27.1.1970, within the meaning of the decided cases P. 6); of the Court relating to the direct effect of Community provisions. Under Article 9 — the conditions set out in Articles of Regulation No 1975/69 the Commission 5(2) and 6 of Regulation No alone is competent to determine the detailed 2195/69 have been fulfilled; rules of application to be observed for the actual payment of the subsidy. Article 10 — the proof of slaughter of milk cows of that regulation prohibits the national mentioned in Article 9 of Regula­ authorities from imposing additional con­ tion. No 2195/69 has been pro­ ditions for the grant of subsidies without duced.' the prior authorization of the Commission. The Commission set out the detailed rules 4. The order making the reference was for application in rigid and comprehensive. received at the Court Registry on 17. terms and the national authorities were November 1971. Mrs Leonesi, the Govern­ only empowered to collect the applications ment of the Italian Republic and the Com­ and to verify certain facts. mission of. the European Communities In fact the Commission, not the Member submitted written observations in accor­ States, had a discretionary power in that dance with Article 20 of the Protocol on it was in a position to decide whether. the Statute of the Court of Justice. applications made should be allowed to Upon hearing the report of the Judge- proceed or not (Article 5(1) of Regulation Rapporteur and the views of the Advocate- No 2195/69). However, once this decision General, the Court decided to dispense had been taken, which was done by Regula­ with a preparatory inquiry. tion No 140/70, there remained no discré- 290.; LEONESIO v ITALIAN MINISTRY FOR AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY tionary power with regard to its execution, in the 'Gazzetta Ufficiale' of the Italian which was to be carried out by the national Republic Law No 935 of 26 October 1971, authorities. Indeed the payment of the the implementation of which may satisfy subsidy which had to be carried out within the claims of the applicant, nevertheless, the period laid down in Article 10 of in accordance with the judgment of the Regulation No 2195/69 was only subject Court of 14 December 1971 (Case 43/71 to the actual existence of milk cows, to Politi v Italian Ministry of Finance [1971] the undertaking to cease milk production ECR 1039) this alteration in the domestic and to proof of slaughter. The relevant law has no effect on the jurisdiction of the regulations do not provide that any Court to decide on the reference from the authorization may be granted by the Pretore di Lonato.