Request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven (Netherlands) lodged on 23 July 2018 — Compaxo Vlees Zevenaar B.V., Ekro B.V., Vion Apeldoorn B.V., Vitelco B.V. v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit

(Case C-478/18)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Compaxo Vlees Zevenaar B.V., Ekro B.V., Vion Apeldoorn B.V., Vitelco B.V.

Respondent: Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit

Questions referred

Should the phrases ‘the staff involved in the official controls’ in point 1 of Annex VI to Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 ¹ of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules (‘Regulation No 882/2004’) and ‘the staff involved in the official controls’ in point 2 of Annex VI to Regulation No 882/2004 be interpreted as meaning that the (salary) costs that may be taken into account when calculating the fees for official controls, may only be the (salary) costs of official veterinarians and official auxiliaries who perform the official inspections, or can they also include the (salary) costs of other staff employed by the Nederlandse Voedsel- en Warenautoriteit (Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority; ‘NVWA’) or by the private company Kwaliteitskeuring Dierlijke Sector (‘KDS’)?

If the answer to question 1 is that the phrases ‘the staff involved in the official controls’ in point 1 of Annex VI to Regulation No 882/2004 and ‘the staff involved in the official controls’ in point 2 of Annex VI to Regulation No 882/2004 may also include the (salary) costs of other staff employed by the NVWA or KDS, under what circumstances and within which limits is there then still such a relationship between the costs incurred for that other staff and the official controls, that the reimbursement of those (salary) costs can be based on Article 27(4) and Annex VI, points 1 and 2, of Regulation No 882/2004?

Should the provisions of Article 27(4)(a) and of Annex VI, points 1 and 2, of Regulation No 882/2004 be interpreted as meaning that the aforementioned Article 27(4)(a) and Annex VI, points 1 and 2, preclude slaughterhouses from being charged fees in relation to official controls for quarter-hours requested by those slaughterhouses from the competent authorities but not actually worked for the purposes of official controls?

____________

¹     OJ 2004 L 165, p. 1.