Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62018TN0125

Case T-125/18: Action brought on 28 February 2018 — Associazione — GranoSalus v Commission

IO C 152, 30.4.2018, p. 46–47 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

30.4.2018   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 152/46

Action brought on 28 February 2018 — Associazione — GranoSalus v Commission

(Case T-125/18)

(2018/C 152/56)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Associazione Nazionale GranoSalus — Liberi — Cerealicoltori & Consumatori (Associazione — GranoSalus) (Foggia, Italia) (represented by: G. Dalfino, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2324 of 12 December 2017, published in the Official Journal of the European Union of 15 December 2017, renewing the approval of the active substance glyphosate 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, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/201.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

1.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 168, 169 and 191 TFEU in conjunction with Article 35 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, Regulation (EU) 2016/429 and Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2017/2393, Directive 98/83/EC and Directive (EU) 2015/1787; infringement of the precautionary principle, the principles of proportionality and reasonableness, and the principles of sound, proper and transparent administration; misuse of powers because the facts have been distorted and the preliminary investigation and statement of reasons are insufficient and exist in appearance only; manifest illogicality, mistaken grounds and misapplication of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2324.

In support of this plea in law, the applicant claims:

—

that Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2324 is contrary to the principles and precautions laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 for the protection of human health, consumers, animals and the environment;

—

infringement of the precautionary principle and incompatibility with the case-law of the General Court and the Court of Justice;

—

failure to carry out proper preliminary investigation into the effects of glyphosate, in particular on animals and groundwater, and breach of the procedures set out in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009;

—

unlawfulness of the specifications of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2324 in that they are left to the Member States’ discretion without any reference standard having been fixed.

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2017/2324 is unlawful for breach of the right to health of GranoSalus members, and incompatibility with the CAP guidelines in Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2017/2393.

In support of that plea in law, the applicant claims that:

—

the presence of glyphosate in everyday goods and products affects the health of GranoSalus members, EU citizens and consumers;

—

the use of glyphosate affects the marketing of GranoSalus members’ products and the proper functioning of the rules of competition within the European Union.
Top