1.

Are the provisions of Directive 2015/412/EC, (2) which insert Articles 26b and 26c into Directive 2001/18/EC, (3) to include the possibility for Member States to ‘(…) demand that the geographical scope of the written consent or authorisation be adjusted to the effect that all or part of the territory of that Member State is to be excluded from cultivation (…)’, and the ensuing Commission Decision No 321 of 3 March 2016 consistent with the principle of non-discrimination between national and non-national products, with the principle of proportionality and with Articles 34, 36 and 216(2) TFEU?

2.

Are the provisions of Directive 2015/412/EC, which insert Articles 26b and 26c into Directive 2001/18/EC, to include the possibility for Member States to ‘(…) demand that the geographical scope of the written consent or authorisation be adjusted to the effect that all or part of the territory of that Member State is to be excluded from cultivation (…)’, and the ensuing Commission Decision No 321 of 3 March 2016 consistent with Articles 16 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

3.

Are the provisions of Directive 2015/412/EC, which insert Articles 26b and 26c into Directive 2001/18/EC, to include the possibility for Member States to ‘(…) demand that the geographical scope of the written consent or authorisation be adjusted to the effect that all or part of the territory of that Member State is to be excluded from cultivation (…)’, and the ensuing Commission Decision No 321 of 3 March 2016, consistent with Article 18 TFEU and Article 21 of the Nice Charter, given that the principle of non-discrimination is a pillar of the European Union?

If so: question on interpretation of Commission Decision No 321 of 3 March 2016

4.

Must Commission Decision No 321 of 3 March 2016 be interpreted as meaning that applications for restrictions of the right to cultivate MON810 GMO maize seeds are permitted by, and are in accordance with, the TEU and the TFEU only on the grounds set out in Article 26b(3)(a) to (g) of Directive 2001/18/EC, or have they been permitted under the transitional rules laid down in Article 26c of Directive 2001/18/EC, as well as on other grounds, including economic grounds, which may differ from State to State?

On the basis of the answer to the latter question of interpretation, the Court of Justice is asked the following:

5.

Is Commission Decision No 321 of 3 March 2016 therefore valid, in the light of the whole body of rules governing GMOs in the single European market, and does it not preclude national rules sanctioning the prohibition contained therein?