- 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-141/22, TLL The Longevity Labs: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 25 May 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Graz — Austria) — TLL The Longevity Labs GmbH v Optimize Health Solutions mi GmbH, BM (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Food safety — Novel food — Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 — Sprouted buckwheat flour with a high spermidine content — Germination of buckwheat seeds in a nutrient solution containing spermidine)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62022CA0141
62022CA0141
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
17.7.2023
Official Journal of the European Union
C 252/9
(Case C-141/22, (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>) TLL The Longevity Labs)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Food safety - Novel food - Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 - Sprouted buckwheat flour with a high spermidine content - Germination of buckwheat seeds in a nutrient solution containing spermidine)
(2023/C 252/08)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: TLL The Longevity Labs GmbH
Defendant: Optimize Health Solutions mi GmbH, BM
Operative part of the judgment
Article 3(2)(a)(iv) of Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on novel foods, amending Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EC) No 258/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1852/2001
must be interpreted as meaning that a food, such as sprouted buckwheat flour with a high spermidine content, which was not used for human consumption to a significant degree within the European Union before 15 May 1997, constitutes a ‘novel food’ within the meaning of that provision given that, first, it is obtained from a plant, secondly, it is not apparent that its safety has been confirmed with compositional data and from experience of continued use for at least 25 years in the customary diet of a significant number of people in at least one country of the European Union, and, thirdly and in any event, it is not obtained by propagating practices, within the meaning of that provision.
Language of the case: German.