- 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-310/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands) lodged on 11 May 2022 — Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) v College voor de toelating van gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden in the presence of: BASF Nederland BV (BASF)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62022CN0310
62022CN0310
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
19.9.2022
Official Journal of the European Union
C 359/22
(Case C-310/22)
(2022/C 359/23)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe)
Defendant: College voor de toelating van gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden
Questions referred
1.Does it follow from the second paragraph of Article 4(1) of Regulation 1107/2009, (1) in conjunction with paragraph 3.6.5 of Annex II thereto, that the potential endocrine disrupting properties of an active substance need no longer be assessed during the assessment at national level of an application for authorisation of a plant protection product?
2.If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, does it mean that the scientific insights and technical knowledge relating to endocrine disrupting properties, which, for example, underpin Regulations 283/2013 (2) and 2018/605, (3) need not be taken into account when assessing the authorisation of a plant protection product? How does that relate to the requirement of Article 29(1)(e) of Regulation 1107/2009 that such an assessment must be conducted on the basis of current scientific and technical knowledge?
3.If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, how can a non-governmental organisation such as the appellant be said to have an effective remedy under Article 47 of the Charter to refer the approval of an active substance to a court of law?
4.If the answer to the first question is in the negative, does it mean that, when assessing an application for authorisation, the state of scientific and technical knowledge about that endocrine disrupting property at that time is decisive?
(1) Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC (OJ 2009 L 309, p. 1).
(2) Commission Regulation (EU) No 283/2013 of 1 March 2013 setting out the data requirements for active substances, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (OJ 2013 L 93, p. 1).
(3) Commission Regulation (EU) 2018/605 of 19 April 2018 amending Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 by setting out scientific criteria for the determination of endocrine disrupting properties (OJ 2018 L 101, p. 33).