1. ECHA
  2. O nas
  3. Kako delamo
  4. Postopki in politike
  5. Preglednost
  6. Zadeve, v katerih je bila agencija ECHA stranka v postopku
  7. Authorisation

Primeri, ko je agencija ECHA v vlogi tožene stranke ali intervenienta

Primeri, ko je agencija ECHA v vlogi tožene stranke ali intervenienta

Primeri, ko je agencija ECHA v vlogi tožene stranke ali intervenienta

Preglednica vsebuje seznam vseh sodnih postopkov, zaključenih z odločbo sodišča, v katerih je bila agencija ECHA stranka v postopku. Zainteresirane strani se lahko enostavno sklicujejo na sodne odločbe, ki bi jih utegnile zadevati v okviru osrednjih dejavnosti agencije ECHA (med drugim v zvezi z uredbama REACH ali CLP). V preglednici so navedene tudi zadeve, v zvezi s katerimi je bila vložena pritožba, ki morda še ni bila rešena, ali ki so bile vrnjene v ponovno odločanje. Vključene pa niso zadeve, ki se nanašajo na kadrovske zadeve ali razpise za javna naročila.

Zaključeni sodni postopki so razvrščeni v osem kategorij:

  1. Seznam kandidatnih snovi v skladu z uredbo REACH: zadeve, ki se nanašajo na opredelitev snovi kot snovi, ki vzbuja veliko zaskrbljenost;
  2. Registracija v skladu z uredbo REACH: zadeve, povezane z obveznostjo skupne predložitve podatkov;
  3. Avtorizacija v skladu z uredbo REACH: zadeve, ki se nanašajo na vključitev snovi na seznam za avtorizacijo (Priloga XIV) in na vloge za avtorizacijo;
  4. Evalvacija v skladu z uredbo REACH: zadeve, pri katerih je agencija ECHA med postopkom evalvacije registracijskega zavezanca zaprosila za dodatne informacije (členi 40, 41 ali 46 uredbe REACH);
  5. Usklajeno razvrščanje in označevanje (CLH): zadeve, ki se nanašajo na usklajeno razvrstitev snovi;
  6. Biocidi: zadeve, ki se nanašajo na biocide;
  7. Dostop do dokumentov: zadeve, ki se nanašajo na zahtevke za dostop do dokumentov;
  8. Velikost podjetij: zadeve, ki se nanašajo na preverjanje velikosti podjetij in s tem povezano plačilo pristojbin. 
Sorodne povezave

Vse jezikovne različice sodnih postopkov, vključno z nerešenimi, je mogoče najti na spletni strani Sodišča Evropske unije.

    >
  • BG
  • CS
  • DA
  • DE
  • EL
  • EN
  • ES
  • ET
  • FI
  • FR
  • HR
  • HU
  • IT
  • LT
  • LV
  • MT
  • NL
  • PL
  • PT
  • RO
  • SK
  • SL
  • SV

 

 

Case number Parties Keywords Main Legal Provisions Procedurally linked cases Date of the ruling
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 Appeal:
C-651/15 P 		25/09/2015
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 Initial case:
T-360/13 		13/07/2017
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

Appeal:

C-389/19 P-R

 07/03/2019
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
T‑610/17 ICL-IP Terneuzen, BV, and ICL Europe Coöperatief UA v European Commission (ECHA as intervener) REACH — Substances subject to authorisation — Inclusion of 1-bromoproprane (nPB) in Annex XIV to Regulation No 1907/2006 — Volumes — Registration dossier — Data — Substance grouping — Principle of sound administration — Right to conduct business and pursue a trade freely — Obligation to state reasons — Legitimate expectations — Proportionality — Equal treatment Art 57 (c), 58 (3), 59 (8) and  Annex XIV of REACH 20/09/2019
C-389/19 P-R European Commission v. Kingdom of Sweden (ECHA as intervener) Reference – Appeal – Articles 278 and 279 TFEU – Application for a stay execution – Request for interim measures – Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 – Chemical substances – Classification, labelling and packaging of certain substances and mixtures – Commission Decision on the authorisation for the use of yellow and red chromate, molybdate and lead sulfate Articles 278 and 279 TFEU

Initial case:
T-837/16

 21/11/19

C-389/19 P

 Commission v Sweden Appeal – Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 – Registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals – European Commission decision authorising certain uses of lead sulfochromate yellow and lead chromate molybdate sulfate red, substances listed in Annex XIV of that regulation – Substances of very high concern – Conditions of authorisation – Assessment of the lack of suitable alternatives

Article 60(4) of the REACH Regulation No 1907/2006
 

Appeal of the Case T-837/16

25/02/2021