Opinion of Mr advocate-general Roemer

Mr President,

Members of the Court,

In view of the fact that the situation on the market in milk and milk products in the Community [was] marked by large and increasing surpluses, the Council of Ministers decided to establish a system of subsidies whereby farmers were to be encouraged to reduce the number of milk cows by slaughtering. This was done by Regulation No 1975 of 6 October 1969 (JO L 252, p. 1). Article 2 of that regulation provided for the grant of a subsidy (of which half was to be paid from Community funds) to cattle owners who undertook in writing to give up the production of milk entirely and to have all milk cows on their farms slaughtered at the latest by 30 April 1970. Detailed provisions for the computation of the subsidies were contained in Article 3 of the regulation. Article 4 provided (in so far as is relevant here) that For farmers having two to five milk cows, the subsidy shall be paid when the applicant submits proof that he has fulfilled the undertaking referred to in Article 2(b) (that is, the undertaking to have all his milk cows slaughtered by 30 April 1970 at the latest).

Implementing provisions relating to this regulation were contained in Regulation No 2195/69 of the Commission of 4 November 1969 (JO L 278. p. 6). Article 3 of that regulation provided that applications for payment of the slaughtering subsidy containing certain information could be submitted to the competent authority designated by each Member State until 20 December 1969. Under Article 4 the information submitted was to be examined by the competent national authorities. Article 11 provided that the Member States were to inform the Commission by 10 January 1970 of the number of applications submitted. The procedure under Article 27 of Regulation No 805/68 (OJ English Special Edition, 1968(1) p. 187) (the so-called Management Committee procedure) was to determine whether the applications submitted could be allowed to proceed. In the present case this was done by Regulation No 140/70 of the Commission of 26 January 1970 (JO L 20, p. 6). It determined that applications which had been submitted before 31 December 1969 could be granted. Regulation No 2195 also provided that further operations must be carried out by the competent national authority. Under Article 5 all milk cows kept on the farms concerned were to be marked; the number of milk cows giving entitlement to the subsidy was to be determined taking into account cows kept on an appointed day to be determined by each Member State, and the written undertaking to cease entirely the production of milk during a period of five years starting from the slaughtering of the last milk cow and to have all milk cows slaughtered made by each farmer making an application was to be registered. For this purpose the competent national authority was to issue an identification card to accompany each milk cow at all stages until it is slaughtered. Pursuant to Article 7 of Regulation No 2195, slaughtering was to take place between 9 February and 30 April 1970. Proof of this was to be submitted to the competent national authority by means of the abovementioned identification card which would be given to the farmer by the manager of the slaughterhouse and also by means of a certificate from the manager of the slaughterhouse stating the time of slaughter. Finally, Article 10 further provides, and this is of particular importance in the present case, that Payment of the subsidy referred to in (Article 4 (1) and the first sentence of Article 4(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1975/69 shall take place within two months of the establishment of proof of the slaughtering in accordance with Article 9 of this regulation.

This scheme was also applied in Italy. On 23 March 1970 a circular was issued by the Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry. It provided inter alia that the ispettorati provinciali dell'agricoltura were competent to examine the applications submitted and it named the relevant slaughterhouses. Finally, it was expressly stated that implementation of the measures was dependent upon the entry into force of a national law allocating the necessary funds; for that reason only provisional authorizations could be issued and the duty to make the payment could only be finally determined after the adoption of that law. The necessary Law (No 935) was adopted on 26 October 1971 and published in the Gazzetta Ufficiale of 12 November 1971. It provided for the allocation of Lit. 1000 million to the budget of the Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry for 1970.

The plaintiff in the main action, a farmer from the province of Brescia, also sought to benefit from this scheme. Therefore she submitted the necessary application for five milk cows on 20 December 1969. The application was accepted, and on 27 April 1970 a provisional authorization to slaughter was issued and a subsidy of Lit. 625000 was fixed. The cows were slaughtered and the prescribed proof was submitted. However, as payment was dependent on the adoption of a law allocating the necessary funds, payment of the subsidy was not made within two months of the submission of proof of the slaughtering as provided in Article 10 of Regulation No 2195. Mrs Leonesio regards this behaviour on the part of the Italian authorities as an infringement of the right she enjoys under Community regulations. Therefore in November 1970, pursuant to Article 633 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, she brought an action against the Italian Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry for an order for payment of Lit. 625000 and the interest which had become due since 6 May 1970. By an order of 3 November 1971, the Judge stayed proceedings while they were still in their preliminary phase because the claim was based in Community law and because he thought there existed a problem of interpretation, and referred the following questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling:

After the plaintiff in the main action, the Government of the Italian Republic and the Commission of the European Communities have submitted written and oral observations it is now my task to examine these questions.

1. I must first make two preliminary observations.

2. The first question concerns basically the problem of the direct applicability of the Community regulations referred to in my summary of the facts.

3. The second question seeks a further, more detailed interpretation. It requires the Court to define the individual rights arising under Community law in a certain manner.

4. I therefore suggest that the questions referred by the Pretore di Lonato should be answered as follows :

1 Translated from the German.