# C_2011055EN.01000802.xml

| 19.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven — Netherlands) — Stichting Natuur en Milieu, Vereniging Milieudefensie, Vereniging Goede Waar & Co. v College voor de toelating van gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden, formerly College voor de toelating van bestrijdingsmiddelen

(Case C-266/09) (1)

1

(Environment - Plant protection products - Directive 91/414/EEC - Public access to information - Directives 90/313/EEC and 2003/4/EC - Temporal application - Concept of environmental information - Confidentiality of commercial and industrial information)

2011/C 55/13

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Stichting Natuur en Milieu, Vereniging Milieudefensie, Vereniging Goede Waar & Co.

Applicants:

Defendant: College voor de toelating van gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden, formerly College voor de toelating van bestrijdingsmiddelen

Defendant:

Other parties: Bayer CropScience BV, Nederlandse Stichting voor Fytofarmacie

Other parties:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands) — Interpretation of Article 14 of 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) and Articles 2 and 4 of Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC (OJ 2003 L 41, p. 26) — Information communicated to the national authorities within the framework of a procedure for the authorisation of a plant protection product, enabling the determination of the maximum quantity of a pesticide, a component thereof or reaction products which may be present in food or beverages — Confidentiality and public interest

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | The term ‘environmental information’ in Article 2 of Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC must be interpreted as including information submitted within the framework of a national procedure for the authorisation or the extension of the authorisation of a plant protection product with a view to setting the maximum quantity of a pesticide, a component thereof or reaction products which may be present in food or beverages. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The term ‘environmental information’ in Article 2 of Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC must be interpreted as including information submitted within the framework of a national procedure for the authorisation or the extension of the authorisation of a plant protection product with a view to setting the maximum quantity of a pesticide, a component thereof or reaction products which may be present in food or beverages.

| 2. | Provided that a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings is not one of those listed in the second paragraph of Article 14 of Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, the first paragraph of Article 14 of that directive must be interpreted as being capable of application only in so far as the obligations under Article 4(2) of Directive 2003/4 are not affected. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Provided that a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings is not one of those listed in the second paragraph of Article 14 of Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, the first paragraph of Article 14 of that directive must be interpreted as being capable of application only in so far as the obligations under Article 4(2) of Directive 2003/4 are not affected.

| 3. | Article 4 of Directive 2003/4 must be interpreted as meaning that the balancing exercise it prescribes between the public interest served by the disclosure of environmental information and the specific interest served by a refusal to disclose must be carried out in each individual case submitted to the competent authorities, even if the national legislature were by a general provision to determine criteria to facilitate that comparative assessment of the interests involved. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Article 4 of Directive 2003/4 must be interpreted as meaning that the balancing exercise it prescribes between the public interest served by the disclosure of environmental information and the specific interest served by a refusal to disclose must be carried out in each individual case submitted to the competent authorities, even if the national legislature were by a general provision to determine criteria to facilitate that comparative assessment of the interests involved.

---

(1)  OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.

1

---