- 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-392/23, Rustrans: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 19 December 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Bacău – Romania) – Rustrans SRL v Ministerul Agriculturii şi Dezvoltării Rurale – Direcţia Generală Pescuit – Autoritatea de Management pentru POPAM (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common fisheries policy – European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) – Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 – Article 69 – Concept of eligible expenditure – Articles 4 and 125 – Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 – Article 48(1)(c) – Modernisation of an aquaculture unit – Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 – Article 33 – Principle of sound financial management – Contribution in kind in the form of land and buildings located on that land – Direct link between the contribution in kind and the operation financed)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CA0392
62023CA0392
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 series
—
C/2025/1065
(Case C-392/23, (1) Rustrans)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common fisheries policy - European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) - Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 - Article 69 - Concept of ‘eligible expenditure’ - Articles 4 and 125 - Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 - Article 48(1)(c) - Modernisation of an aquaculture unit - Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 - Article 33 - Principle of sound financial management - Contribution in kind in the form of land and buildings located on that land - Direct link between the contribution in kind and the operation financed)
(C/2025/1065)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Rustrans SRL
Defendant: Ministerul Agriculturii şi Dezvoltării Rurale – Direcţia Generală Pescuit – Autoritatea de Management pentru POPAM
Operative part of the judgment
Article 65(1) and (2), Article 67(1)(a) and Article 69 of 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, read in conjunction with Article 4 and Article 125(1) of that regulation and with Article 33 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012, must be interpreted as meaning that a contribution in kind made by a beneficiary in the form of the provision of land and buildings located on that land for the purposes of a project for the modernisation of an aquaculture unit consisting solely of the purchase of specific equipment, technological machinery and materials for an existing fish farm does not fall within the concept of ‘eligible expenditure’ within the meaning of those provisions.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1065/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—
* * *