8.10.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 298/9 |
Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 28 July 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria)) — Agrana Zucker GmbH v Bundesminister für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft
(Case C-309/10) (1)
(Sugar - Temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the European Community - Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 - Article 11 - Revenue surplus in the restructuring fund - Assignment to the EAGF - Principle of conferral and principle of proportionality - Obligation to state reasons - Unjust enrichment)
2011/C 298/15
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Verwaltungsgerichtshof
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Agrana Zucker GmbH
Defendant: Bundesminister für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Interpretation of Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 of 20 February 2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community and amending Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ 2006 L 58, p. 42) — Levying of a temporary restructuring amount in a situation in which the temporary restructuring fund shows a considerable surplus and there appears to be no prospect of an increase in financing requirements — Equivalent to introduction of a general tax — Infringement of the principle of conferred powers
Operative part of the judgment
1. |
Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 of 20 February 2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community and amending Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy is to be interpreted as meaning that the temporary amount must be raised in full, even if there were to be a revenue surplus in the temporary restructuring fund. |
2. |
The examination of the second question referred for a preliminary ruling has not revealed anything which might affect the validity of Article 11 of Regulation No 320/2006. |