- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-251/21: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) — Latvia) — ‘Piltenes meži’ SIA v Lauku atbalsta dienests (Reference for a preliminary ruling — European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) — Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 — Support for rural development by the EAFRD — Article 30 — Natura 2000 payments — Scope — Application for aid in respect of a micro-reserve created in a forest that is not part of the Natura 2000 network, with the purpose of protecting a species of wild bird — Regulation (EU) No 702/2014 — Block exemption for certain types of aid to the agriculture and forestry sectors — Application to aid co-financed by means of EU resources — No application to undertakings in difficulty)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CA0251
62021CA0251
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C 237/17
(Case C-251/21) (*)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) - Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 - Support for rural development by the EAFRD - Article 30 - Natura 2000 payments - Scope - Application for aid in respect of a micro-reserve created in a forest that is not part of the Natura 2000 network, with the purpose of protecting a species of wild bird - Regulation (EU) No 702/2014 - Block exemption for certain types of aid to the agriculture and forestry sectors - Application to aid co-financed by means of EU resources - No application to undertakings in difficulty)
(2022/C 237/22)
Language of the case: Latvian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: ‘Piltenes meži’ SIA
Defendant: Lauku atbalsta dienests
Operative part of the judgment
1.Article 30 of Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 must be interpreted as meaning, in particular taking account of Article 30(6), that aid applied for in respect of a micro-reserve, created in a forest in pursuance of the objectives of Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, falls within the scope of Article 30;
2.Commission Regulation (EU) No 702/2014 of 25 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 [TFEU] must be interpreted as meaning that aid applied for on the basis of Regulation No 1305/2013, in respect of a micro-reserve created in a forest in pursuance of the objectives of Directive 2009/147, by an undertaking in difficulty, within the meaning of Article 2(14) of Regulation No 702/2014, cannot be declared compatible with the internal market under that latter regulation.
(*) Language of the case: Latvian.
ECLI:EU:C:2022:140