Official Journal of the European Union

C series

—

C/2025/2189

22.4.2025

(Case C-193/25)

(C/2025/2189)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Defendants: European Parliament, Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—annul Article 9(1) of Directive (EU) 2024/3019 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 concerning urban wastewater treatment, (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>) in conjunction with Annex III to that directive;

—order the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

In the alternative, should the Court find that the provisions at issue cannot be separated from the remaining provisions on extended producer responsibility without changing the substance of those provisions, the Republic of Poland claims that the Court should annul all provisions relating to extended producer responsibility, that is to say, Article 2(20), Article 9, Article 10, Article 30(1), second paragraph, points (c) and (g), and Annex III to Directive 2024/3019.

Pleas in law and main arguments

(1)Plea in law alleging breach of the ‘polluter pays’ principle set out in Article 191(2) TFEU and of the principle of equal treatment (prohibition of discrimination)

Poland is of the view that the defendant institutions have breached the ‘polluter pays’ principle and the principle of equal treatment (prohibition of discrimination) by establishing measures which place the responsibility for the additional treatment necessary to remove micropollutants solely on the producers of medicinal products and cosmetic products, while ignoring other categories of producers which contribute to the emission of those pollutants.

(2)Plea in law alleging breach of the principle of proportionality set out in Article 5(4) TEU, in conjunction with Article 296 and Article 191(3) TFEU, by establishing measures which incur costs that are disproportionate to the attainment of the objectives pursued

Poland submits that, by adopting the solution introduced in Article 9(1) of the contested Directive, in conjunction with Annex III to that directive, incurring costs that are disproportionate to the expected results, the defendant institutions have breached the principle of proportionality. At the same time, by failing to provide adequate justification for introducing solutions the consequences of which are significant, the defendant institutions have failed to comply with the obligation to justify the adopted act. Furthermore, in drafting the contested Directive, insufficient account was taken of available scientific and technical data, the potential benefits and costs of action or lack of action, and the economic and social development of the Union as a whole and the balanced development of its regions, contrary to Article 191(3) TFEU.

—

(1) OJ L 2024/3019, p. 1.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2189/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

—