Bírósági ügyek, amelyekben az ECHA alperesként vagy beavatkozó félként vesz részt

Bírósági ügyek, amelyekben az ECHA alperesként vagy beavatkozó félként vesz részt

Bírósági ügyek, amelyekben az ECHA alperesként vagy beavatkozó félként vesz részt

Ez a táblázat tartalmazza az összes, ítélettel lezárt bírósági ügyet, amelyben az ECHA félként szerepelt. Az érdekelt felek könnyen kikereshetik azokat a határozatokat, amelyek az ECHA fő tevékenységeinek (többek között a REACH- és a CLP-rendelet) a szempontjából fontosak lehetnek a számukra. Előfordulhat, hogy egy ügy jogorvoslati szakaszban van vagy azt továbbutalták, ami szintén szerepel a táblázatban. A táblázatban a személyzeti és közbeszerzési ügyek nem szerepelnek.

A lezárt bírósági ügyeket nyolc kategóriába sorolták:

  1. REACH Jelöltlista: a vegyi anyagok különös aggodalomra okot adó vegyi anyagokként történő azonosításával kapcsolatos ügyek;
  2. REACH regisztrálás: az adatszolgáltatási kötelezettség közös benyújtásával kapcsolatos ügyek;
  3. REACH Engedélyezés: a vegyi anyagok engedélyezési jegyzékbe (XIV. melléklet) történő felvételével és az engedélyezés iránti kérelmekkel kapcsolatos ügyek;
  4. REACH Értékelés: azok az ügyek, amelyekben az ECHA az értékelési eljárás keretében információt kért egy regisztrálótól (a REACH 40., 41. vagy 46. cikke);
  5. CLH: egy vegyi anyag osztályozásának a harmonizálásával kapcsolatos ügyek;
  6. Biocidek: a biocidekkel kapcsolatos ügyek;
  7. ATD: az iratbetekintés iránti kérelmekkel kapcsolatos ügyek;
  8. Vállalatméret: a vállalatméret ellenőrzésével és a kapcsolódó díjakkal kapcsolatos ügyek. 

 

Case number Parties Keywords Main Legal Provisions Procedurally linked cases Date of the ruling
T-669/15 R Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann and Others v ECHA Application for interim measures — REACH — Making available on the market and use of biocidal products — Inclusion of a company as a supplier of an active substance on the list referred to in Article 95 of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 — Application for suspension of operation — Lack of urgency Art. 278, 279, 256(1) of TFEU;
Art. 95 of BPR;
Art. 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights

Initial Case:
T-669/15

Appeal on the Initial Case:
C-663/16 P

17/12/2015
T-543/15R Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann and Others v ECHA Application for interim measures — REACH — Making available on the market and use of biocidal products — Inclusion of a company as a supplier of an active substance on the list referred to in Article 95 of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 — Application for suspension of operation — Lack of urgency Art. 278, 279, 256(1) of TFEU;
Art. 95 of BPR;
Art. 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights

Initial Case:
T-543/15

Appeal on the Initial Case:
C-666/16 P

17/12/2015
T-669/15 Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann and Others v ECHA Actions for annulment — Inclusion as supplier of an active substance on the list provided for in Article 95 of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 — Lack of direct concern — Inadmissibility Art. 95 of BPR; Art. 263 of TFEU
  1. Proceedings for interim measures
    T-669/15 R
  2. Appeal
    C-663/16 P
12/10/2016
T-543/15 Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann and Others v ECHA Actions for annulment — Inclusion as supplier of an active substance on the list provided for in Article 95 of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 — Lack of direct concern — Inadmissibility Art. 95 of BPR; Art. 263 of TFEU
  1. Proceedings for interim measures
    T-543/15 R
  2. Appeal
    C-666/16 P
12/10/2016
C-663/16 P Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann and Ecolab Deutschland v ECHA Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice –– Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 — Making available on the market and use of biocidal products — Article 95 — European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) — Publication of a list of active substances — Inclusion of a company as a supplier of an active substance Art. 130(1), 130(7) and 181 of the Rules of Procedure

Initial Case:
T-669/15

Proceedings for interim measures:
T-669/15 R

19/07/2017
C-666/16 P Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann and Ecolab Deutschland v ECHA Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice –– Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 — Making available on the market and use of biocidal products — Article 95 — European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) — Publication of a list of active substances — Inclusion of a company as a supplier of an active substance Art. 130(1) and 130(7) of the Rules of Procedure

Initial Case:
T-543/15

Proceedings for Interim Measures:
T-543/15 R

19/07/2017
T-243/17 Ecolab Deutschland and Lysoform Dr. Hans Rosemann v ECHA Removal from the register Art. 263 of TFEU 18/10/2017

T-347/18

Laboratoire Pareva and Biotech3D v Commission Biocidal products – Active substance PHMB (1415; 4.7) – Refusal of approval for product-types 1, 5 and 6 – Conditional approval for product-types 2 and 4 – Risks to human health and the environment – Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 – Article 6(7)(a) and (b) of Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1062/2014 – Harmonised classification of the active substance under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 – Prior consultation of the ECHA – Manifest error of assessment – Read-across – Right to be heard

Regulation (EU) 528/2012,
Article 6(7)(a) and (b) of the Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1062/2014,
Regulation (EC) 1272/2008
 

15/09/2021

T-734/18

Sumitomo Chemical and Tenka Best v Commission Removal from the registrer 18/12/2019

T-337/18

Laboratoire Pareva v Commission Biocidal products – Active substance PHMB (1415; 4.7) – Refusal of approval for product-types 1, 5 and 6 – Conditional approval for product-types 2 and 4 – Risks to human health and the environment – Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 – Article 6(7)(a) and (b) of Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1062/2014 – Harmonised classification of the active substance under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 – Prior consultation of the ECHA – Manifest error of assessment – Read-across – Right to be heard

Regulation (EU) 528/2012,
Article 6(7)(a) and (b) of the Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1062/2014,
Regulation (EC) 1272/2008
 

15/09/2021

T-199/21

EurO3zon v ECHA Suspension of evaluation active substance - BPR Regulation 08/04/2023

C-702/21 P

Laboratoire PAREVA S.A.S. v Commission Appeal – Biocidal products – Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 – Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1062/2014 – Active substance PHMB (1415; 4.7) – Refusal of approval as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 1, 5 and 6 – Approval as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 2 and 4 – Teratogenic effect – Human health risk assessment

Appeal – Biocidal products – Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 – Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1062/2014 – Active substance PHMB (1415; 4.7) – Refusal of approval as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 1, 5 and 6 – Approval as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 2 and 4 – Teratogenic effect – Human health risk assessment

Appeal of the Cases  T-337/18 and T-347/18

10/11/2022

T-123/20

Sciessent LLC v Commission Biocidal products – Active substances – Silver zeolite and silver copper zeolite – Refusal of approval for product-types 2 and 7 – Article 4 and Article 19(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 – Efficacy – Active substances for use in treated articles – Assessment of the efficacy of the treated articles themselves – Competence of the Commission – Principle of non-discrimination – Legal certainty – Legitimate expectations

Articles 3(1)(I), 4(1), 19(1), 19(2), Annex II, Annex VI of Regulation (No 528/2012)

COM Decision 2019/1973

16/11/2022

T-122/20

Sciessent LLC v Commission Biocidal products – Active substances – Silver zeolite and silver copper zeolite – Refusal of approval for product-types 2 and 7 – Article 4 and Article 19(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 – Efficacy – Active substances for use in treated articles – Assessment of the efficacy of the treated articles themselves – Competence of the Commission – Principle of non-discrimination – Legal certainty – Legitimate expectations

Articles 3(1)(I), 4(1), 19(1), 19(2), Annex II, Annex VI of Regulation (No 528/2012)

COM Decision 2019/1960

16/11/2022