The Glyphosate Saga in Luxembourg: The Annulment by the Judiciary of the Legislative Ban of Glyphosate-Based Products – A Breach of European Union Law?

IF 1.8 Q1 LAW European Journal of Risk Regulation Pub Date : 2023-09-22 DOI:10.1017/err.2023.63
Alessandra Donati
{"title":"The Glyphosate Saga in Luxembourg: The Annulment by the Judiciary of the Legislative Ban of Glyphosate-Based Products – A Breach of European Union Law?","authors":"Alessandra Donati","doi":"10.1017/err.2023.63","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Administrative Tribunal of Luxembourg, 15 July 2022, case no 44377 and Court of Appeal of Luxembourg, 31 March 2023, case no 47873C On 15 July 2022, the Administrative Tribunal of Luxembourg annulled the decisions by which the Luxembourg Minister for Agriculture, Viticulture, and Consumer Protection had banned all glyphosate-based products. On 31 March 2023, the Court of Appeal upheld the ruling of the Administrative Tribunal. The ground of annulment was the breach by the Luxembourg State of the adversarial principle enshrined in Article 9 of the Grand-Ducal Regulation of 8 June 1979. Yet, for the sake of completeness, the Administrative Tribunal and the Court of Appeal verified the compliance of the decisions banning glyphosate-based products with Articles 36, 41 and 44 of Regulation no 1107/2009. Against this backdrop, this case note provides a critical assessment of the rulings of the Administrative Tribunal and the Court of Appeal from the perspective of European Union law. This analysis might prove to be useful as it enables us to shed light on the conditions allowing Member States to withdraw the authorisation of plant protection products under Regulation no 1107/2009 as well as to identify the hurdles that Member States might need to overcome when banning glyphosate-based products from their territory.","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2023.63","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Administrative Tribunal of Luxembourg, 15 July 2022, case no 44377 and Court of Appeal of Luxembourg, 31 March 2023, case no 47873C On 15 July 2022, the Administrative Tribunal of Luxembourg annulled the decisions by which the Luxembourg Minister for Agriculture, Viticulture, and Consumer Protection had banned all glyphosate-based products. On 31 March 2023, the Court of Appeal upheld the ruling of the Administrative Tribunal. The ground of annulment was the breach by the Luxembourg State of the adversarial principle enshrined in Article 9 of the Grand-Ducal Regulation of 8 June 1979. Yet, for the sake of completeness, the Administrative Tribunal and the Court of Appeal verified the compliance of the decisions banning glyphosate-based products with Articles 36, 41 and 44 of Regulation no 1107/2009. Against this backdrop, this case note provides a critical assessment of the rulings of the Administrative Tribunal and the Court of Appeal from the perspective of European Union law. This analysis might prove to be useful as it enables us to shed light on the conditions allowing Member States to withdraw the authorisation of plant protection products under Regulation no 1107/2009 as well as to identify the hurdles that Member States might need to overcome when banning glyphosate-based products from their territory.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
卢森堡草甘膦事件:司法机构撤销草甘膦产品的立法禁令——违反欧盟法律?
卢森堡行政法庭,2022年7月15日,第44377号案件和卢森堡上诉法院,2023年3月31日,第47873C号案件。2022年7月15日,卢森堡行政法庭撤销了卢森堡农业、葡萄栽培和消费者保护部长禁止所有草甘膦产品的决定。2023年3月31日,上诉法院维持行政审裁处的裁决。废除的理由是卢森堡国违反了1979年6月8日《大公条例》第9条所载的对抗原则。然而,为完整起见,行政法庭和上诉法院核实了禁止草甘膦产品的决定符合第1107/2009号法规第36、41和44条的规定。在此背景下,本案件说明从欧洲联盟法律的角度对行政法庭和上诉法院的裁决进行了批判性评价。这一分析可能会被证明是有用的,因为它使我们能够阐明允许成员国根据第1107/2009号法规撤回植物保护产品授权的条件,并确定成员国在禁止草甘膦产品进入其领土时可能需要克服的障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: European Journal of Risk Regulation is an interdisciplinary forum bringing together legal practitioners, academics, risk analysts and policymakers in a dialogue on how risks to individuals’ health, safety and the environment are regulated across policy domains globally. The journal’s wide scope encourages exploration of public health, safety and environmental aspects of pharmaceuticals, food and other consumer products alongside a wider interpretation of risk, which includes financial regulation, technology-related risks, natural disasters and terrorism.
期刊最新文献
Democratising Food Safety: Why We Need to Look Beyond Government Regulation and Provide a Citizen Right of Action Mind the Gap: Assessing Member States’ Implementation of Farm to Farm-to-Fork Targets within the 2023–2027 Common Agricultural Policy Rethinking Consumer Empowerment: New Directions for Sustainable Food Law in an Era of EU Discontent What EU Conditionality Says about the Rule of Law The Development Risks Defence in the Digital Age
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1