Skip to Content
Skip to Content

Cases where ECHA is a party

Cases where ECHA is a party

This table contains all the court cases closed with a ruling to which ECHA has been a party. Interested parties can easily refer to decisions that may be relevant to them within the scope of ECHA's core activities (REACH, CLP, among others). For some of the cases, there may be a pending appeal or renvoi, which are also listed in the table. The table does not show staff or procurement cases.

The closed court cases have been classified into seven categories:

  1. REACH Candidate List: cases related to the identification of a substance as being of very high concern;
  2. REACH Authorisation: cases related to the inclusion of a substance in the Authorisation List (Annex XIV) and authorisation applications;
  3. REACH Evaluation: cases where ECHA has requested information from a registrant under the evaluation procedure (Articles 40, 41 or 46 of REACH);
  4. CLH: cases concerning the harmonisation of classification of a substance;
  5. Biocides: cases concerning biocides;
  6. ATD: cases related to requests for access to documents;
  7. Company size: cases related to company size verification and related charges. 

ECHA Cases Authorisation

 

Case number Parties Keywords Main Legal Provisions Procedurally linked cases Date of the ruling
T‑837/16 Sweden v Commission (ECHA as intervener) Commission Decision on the authorisation for the use of yellow and red chromate, molybdate and lead sulfate - Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) - Articles 60(4) and (5) - Examination of unavailable resolutions as substitutes - Error of law Articles 60(4) and (5) of REACH 07/03/2019
C-651/15 P VECCO and others v Commission (ECHA as intervener) Appeal — Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH) — Article 58(2) — Authorisation — Substances of very high concern — Exemption — Regulation amending Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Inclusion of chromium trioxide in the list of substances subject to authorisation Art. 58(2) REACH T-360/13 13/07/2017
T-360/13 VECCO and Others v Commission (ECHA as intervener) REACH — Inclusion of chromium trioxide in the list of substances subject to authorisation — Uses or categories of uses exempted from the authorisation requirement — Concept of ‘existing specific Community legislation imposing minimum requirements relating to the protection of human health or the environment for the use of the substance’ — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality — Rights of the defence — Principle of sound administration Art. 58(2) of REACH, Art. 1 of Directive 98/24, Art. 40 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union C-651/15 P 25/09/2015
T‑108/17 ClientEarth v Commission (ECHA as intervener) REACH — Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) — Request for internal review of a decision on marketing authorisation rejected as unfounded — Error of law — Manifest error of assessment — Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 Articles 57(c), 62, 60(7), 62(4), 60(4), 60(5), and 60(2) of REACH 04/04/2019

 

Categories Display

Tagged as:

(click the tag to search for relevant content)


Route: .live1