(Case T-393/18)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Mellifera e. V., Vereinigung für wesensgemäße Bienenhaltung (Rosenfeld, Germany) (represented by: A. Willand, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—annul Decision Ares (2018) 2087165 of the Commission, dated 19 April 2018 and notified to the applicant on 19 April 2018;

—order the Commission to pay the costs of the dispute.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The action is based on the following plea:

Infringement of Article 10(1), in conjunction with Article 2(1)(g), of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 (1) and the Aarhus Convention (2)

—The applicant submits that the renewal of the approval for the active substance glyphosate is an administrative act which may be reviewed in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 10(1) of Regulation No 1367/2006.

—In addition, it is argued, in particular, that the renewal of the approval is a ‘measure of individual scope’ since a decision is taken vis-à-vis the applicant within the framework of the approval procedure.

—It is also submitted that the approval of the active substance glyphosate should have been issued only in accordance with the appropriate restrictions and conditions for the preservation of biodiversity.

—Finally, the applicant criticises errors in the procedure for the renewal of the approval of the active substance glyphosate.

(1) Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies (OJ 2006 L 264, p. 13).

(2) United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters.