# C_2016305EN.01001602.xml

| 22.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/16

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 9 June 2016 — Industrias Químicas del Vallés, S.A. v Administración General del Estado, Sapec Agro, S.A.

(Case C-325/16)

(2016/C 305/23)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Industrias Químicas del Vallés, S.A.

Appellant:

Respondents: Administración General del Estado, Sapec Agro, S.A.

Respondents:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is the deadline set in Directive 2010/28/EU (1) by the use of the phrases ‘by 31 December 2010’ in Article 3(1) and ‘by that date’ in the second paragraph of Article 3(1), which also refers to 31 December 2010, in conjunction with the period of six months referred to in Recital 8 of the preamble to Directive 2010/28/EU, a mandatory time-limit by virtue of the purpose sought by the system established by Council Directive 91/414/EEC (2) of 15 July 1991, and not susceptible of extension by the Member States, such that it must be calculated exclusively in accordance with the directive? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the deadline set in Directive 2010/28/EU (1) by the use of the phrases ‘by 31 December 2010’ in Article 3(1) and ‘by that date’ in the second paragraph of Article 3(1), which also refers to 31 December 2010, in conjunction with the period of six months referred to in Recital 8 of the preamble to Directive 2010/28/EU, a mandatory time-limit by virtue of the purpose sought by the system established by Council Directive 91/414/EEC (2) of 15 July 1991, and not susceptible of extension by the Member States, such that it must be calculated exclusively in accordance with the directive?

1

2

| 2. | In the event that it is held that the time-limit is capable of extension, is the decision concerning such an extension to be taken without regard to any specific procedural rules concerning applying for and granting the extension or does it fall within the competence of the Member States, which must decide the question in accordance with domestic legislation since they are the addressees of the provisions establishing the procedure under Article 3(1) of the directive? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In the event that it is held that the time-limit is capable of extension, is the decision concerning such an extension to be taken without regard to any specific procedural rules concerning applying for and granting the extension or does it fall within the competence of the Member States, which must decide the question in accordance with domestic legislation since they are the addressees of the provisions establishing the procedure under Article 3(1) of the directive?

---

(1)  Commission Directive 2010/28/EU of 23 April 2010 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include metalaxyl as active substance (OJ 2010 L 104, p. 57).

1

(2)  Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (OJ 1991 L 230, p. 1).

2

---