Advertisement

“Confédération paysanne and Others”

Decision of the European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) 25 July 2018 – Case No. C–528/16
  • Confédération paysanne, Réseau Semences Paysannes, Les Amis de la Terre France, Collectif Vigilance OGM et Pesticides 16, Vigilance OG2M, CSFV 49, OGM dangers, Vigilance OGM 33, and Fédération Nature et Progrès v. Premier ministre and Ministre de l’Agriculture, de l’Agroalimentaire et de la Forêt Directive 2001/18/EC, Arts. 2, 3 and Annexes I A and I B; Directive 2M002/53/EC, Art. 4
Decision • Patent Law European Union
  • 2 Downloads
  1. 1.

    Article 2(2) of Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC must be interpreted as meaning that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute genetically modified organisms within the meaning of that provision.

     
  2. 2.

    Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/18, read in conjunction with point 1 of Annex I B to that directive and in the light of recital 17 thereof, must be interpreted as meaning that only organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis which have conventionally been used in a number of applications and have a long safety record are excluded from the scope of that directive.

     
  3. 3.

    Article 4(4) of Council Directive 2002/53/EC of 13 June 2002 on the common catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003, must be interpreted as meaning that genetically modified varieties obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis which have conventionally been used in a number of applications and have a long safety record are exempt from the obligations laid down in that provision.

     
  4. 4.

    Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/18, read in conjunction with point 1 of Annex I B to that directive, in so far as it excludes from the scope of that directive organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis which have conventionally been used in a number of applications and have a long safety record, must be interpreted as meaning that it does not have the effect of denying Member States the option of subjecting such organisms, in compliance with EU law, in particular with the rules on the free movement of goods set out in Articles 34 TFEU to 36 TFEU, to the obligations laid down in that directive or to other obligations.

     

Keywords

Genetically modified organism Mutagenesis Agricultural plant species Herbicide-tolerant plant varieties Human health and environmental protection Exemption 

Copyright information

© Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Confédération paysanne, Réseau Semences Paysannes, Les Amis de la Terre France, Collectif Vigilance OGM et Pesticides 16, Vigilance OG2M, CSFV 49, OGM dangers, Vigilance OGM 33, and Fédération Nature et Progrès v. Premier ministre and Ministre de l’Agriculture, de l’Agroalimentaire et de la Forêt Directive 2001/18/EC, Arts. 2, 3 and Annexes I A and I B; Directive 2M002/53/EC, Art. 4

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations