Order — ECLI:EU:T:2000:185
Date: 2000-07-11
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;Consumer protection
Concepts: Applications by natural or legal persons
Procedure: Action for annulment - inadmissible;Application to intervene - decision unnecessary
Origin: France

Summary of the Order 
Actions for annulment — Natural or legal persons — Measures of direct and individual 
concern to them — Supplement to regulation on organic production of agricultural 
products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs — 
Action brought by associations of economic operators and by a company in the sector 
affected — Inadmissible 
(Arts 230, fourth para., EC and 249 EC; Council Regulation (EC) No 1804/1999 
supplementing Regulation No. 2092/91, Art. 1(7)) 
II - 2893 
SUMMARY — CASE T-268/99 
An action brought by associations of eco­
nomic operators and by a company in the 
sector affected, seeking the annulment of 
Article 1(7) of Regulation No 1804/1999 
supplementing Regulation No 2092/91 on 
organic production of agricultural products 
and indications referring thereto on agri­
cultural products and foodstuffs to include 
livestock production, is inadmissible. 
Regulation No 1804/1999, which contains 
rules of general scope which apply to all the 
traders concerned, is therefore of a legisla­
tive nature and does not constitute a 
decision within the meaning of Article 249 
EC. Article 1(7) of that regulation, which 
contains a temporary derogation to the 
principle that only products obtained in 
accordance with the rules laid down in 
Regulation No 2092/91 may bear indica­
tions referring to an organic method of 
production, applies to objectively deter­
mined situations and involves legal conse­
quences for a category of trade mark 
holders viewed in a general and abstract 
manner. The temporary derogation at issue 
must therefore be regarded as forming an 
integral part of the provisions as a whole in 
which it is contained and is of the same 
general nature as those provisions. 
Moreover, the applicants cannot be con­
sidered to be individually concerned by the 
contested provision, which is of general 
application, since they are not affected by it 
by reasons of certain attributes which are 
peculiar to them or by reason of circum­
stances in which they are differentiated 
from all other persons. 
(see paras 34-35, 37-38, 45) 
II - 2894