# C_2004239EN.01000303.xml

| 25.9.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 239/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 239/3

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven by order of that court of 22 July 2004 in the case of Stichting Zuid-Hollandse Milieufederatie against College voor de toelating van bestrijdingsmiddelen (Ctb)

(Case C-316/04)

(2004/C 239/06)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven of 22 July 2004, received at the Court Registry on 26 July 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Stichting Zuid-Hollandse Milieufederatie against College voor de toelating van bestrijdingsmiddelen (Ctb) on the following questions:

| 1(a) | Can Article 8 of the Plant Protection Products Directive (1) be applied by the national court after the period referred to in Article 23 thereof has expired? |
| --- | --- |

1(a)

Can Article 8 of the Plant Protection Products Directive (1) be applied by the national court after the period referred to in Article 23 thereof has expired?

1

| 1(b) | Can Article 16 of the Biocidal Products Directive (2) be applied by a national court after the period referred to in Article 34 thereof has expired? |
| --- | --- |

1(b)

Can Article 16 of the Biocidal Products Directive (2) be applied by a national court after the period referred to in Article 34 thereof has expired?

2

| 2. | Must Article 16 of the Biocidal Product Directive be interpreted as having the same meaning as Article 8(2) of the Plant Protection Products Directive? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Must Article 16 of the Biocidal Product Directive be interpreted as having the same meaning as Article 8(2) of the Plant Protection Products Directive?

| 3. | Must Article 16(1) of the Biocidal Products Directive be interpreted as a standstill obligation?
  If the answer to this question is in the negative:
  Does Article 16(1) of the Biocidal Products Directive impose limits on amendments to national rules concerning the placing on the market of biocidal products, and if so what limits? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Must Article 16(1) of the Biocidal Products Directive be interpreted as a standstill obligation?

If the answer to this question is in the negative:

Does Article 16(1) of the Biocidal Products Directive impose limits on amendments to national rules concerning the placing on the market of biocidal products, and if so what limits?

| 4. | If the answer to Question 2 is in the negative:






  (a) | Must Article 8(2) of the Plant Protection Products Directive be interpreted as meaning that where a Member State authorises the placing on the market in its territory of plant protection products containing active substances not listed in Annex I to that directive that were already on the market two years after the date of notification of that directive regard must also be had to the provisions of Article 4 thereof? |
| --- | --- | --- |

4.

If the answer to Question 2 is in the negative:

(a)

Must Article 8(2) of the Plant Protection Products Directive be interpreted as meaning that where a Member State authorises the placing on the market in its territory of plant protection products containing active substances not listed in Annex I to that directive that were already on the market two years after the date of notification of that directive regard must also be had to the provisions of Article 4 thereof?

| (b) | Must Article 8(2) of the Plant Protection Products Directive also be interpreted as meaning that where a Member State authorises the placing on the market in its territory of plant protection products containing active substances not listed in Annex I to that directive that were already on the market two years after the date of notification of that directive regard must also be had to the provisions of Article 8(3) thereof? |
| --- | --- |

(b)

Must Article 8(2) of the Plant Protection Products Directive also be interpreted as meaning that where a Member State authorises the placing on the market in its territory of plant protection products containing active substances not listed in Annex I to that directive that were already on the market two years after the date of notification of that directive regard must also be had to the provisions of Article 8(3) thereof?

| 5. | Must Article 8(3) of the Plant Protection Products Directive be interpreted as meaning that 'a review' must also be construed as including an examination whereby regard is to be had to the effects of an active substance concerned on human and animal health and on the environment and on the basis of which this active substance is designated, the result of such designation being that plant protection products containing the active substance are authorised or registered by operation of law? |
| --- | --- |

5.

Must Article 8(3) of the Plant Protection Products Directive be interpreted as meaning that 'a review' must also be construed as including an examination whereby regard is to be had to the effects of an active substance concerned on human and animal health and on the environment and on the basis of which this active substance is designated, the result of such designation being that plant protection products containing the active substance are authorised or registered by operation of law?

| 6. | Must Article 8(3) of the Plant Protection Products Directive be interpreted as meaning that it contains only rules relating to the provision of data before a review or must it be construed as meaning that the requirements set out therein are also relevant to the way in which a review must be organised and carried out? |
| --- | --- |

6.

Must Article 8(3) of the Plant Protection Products Directive be interpreted as meaning that it contains only rules relating to the provision of data before a review or must it be construed as meaning that the requirements set out therein are also relevant to the way in which a review must be organised and carried out?

---

(1)   OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1.

1

(2)   OJ L 123, 24.4.1998, p. 1.

2

---