Official Journal of the European Union

C 424/20

(Case C-471/22)

(2022/C 424/26)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Agentsia ‘Patna infrastruktura’

Defendant: Rakovoditel na upravlyavashtia organ na operativna programa ‘Transport’ 2007-2013 i direktor na direktsia ‘Koordinatsia na programi i proekti’ v Ministerstvoto na transporta

Questions referred

1.Can European Commission Decision С(2021) [5739] of 27 July 2021 cancelling part of the Cohesion Fund contribution to the operational programme ‘Transport 2007-2013’ under the ‘Convergence’ objective in Bulgaria, CCI2007BG161PO004, be regarded as valid in the light of the requirements concerning the legal basis, the statement of reasons, the completeness and the objectivity of the examination carried out, in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 296 TFEU and the principle of good administration under Article 41 of the Charter?

2.Must Article 100 of Council Regulation No 1083/2006 (1) be interpreted as meaning that, for the purposes of the legality of its decisions, the European Commission is not required to establish, examine and qualify all the legally relevant facts in the proceedings, but is required to limit its conclusions to and base them solely on the communication with the Member State and the exchange of observations or notifications with that Member State?

3.In a situation such as the present one, in which there is a final act of the European Commission imposing a financial correction on a Member State for an irregularity in the expenditure of European Union funds in three separate procurement procedures, are the competent national authorities under an obligation to conduct their own procedure for establishing irregularities in order lawfully to make a financial correction under Article 98 of Regulation No 1083/2006?

4.If the previous question is answered in the negative, is it to be assumed that the right of persons to participate in the procedure in which Member States make financial corrections is guaranteed, in accordance with the right to good administration under Article 41 of the Charter?

5.Must Article 47 of the Charter be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation such as the present one, in which there is a final act of the European Commission imposing a financial correction on a Member State for an irregularity in the expenditure of European Union funds in three separate procurement procedures, a national court is bound by the findings and conclusions of the European Commission where it is called upon to rule on an action against the imposition of a financial correction by the competent national authority in connection with one of those procurement procedures, or does it follow from that legal provision that the court must, in the context of a full judicial procedure and using all the means provided for by law, establish and examine the legally relevant facts and circumstances of the dispute, thereby providing the appropriate legal solution?

6.If the previous question is answered to the effect that the national court is bound by the European Commission Decision, including its findings of fact, can it be assumed that persons on whom a financial correction has been imposed are guaranteed the rights to an effective remedy and to a fair hearing under Article 47 of the Charter?

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (OJ 2006 L 210, p. 25).