7.

However, as the national court pointed out, certain articles of the directive in question refer to substances and preparations. Article 2 (1) (b) defines preparations. Article 2 (2) defines what is meant by ‘dangerous’ in regard to substances and preparations. Article 3 provides that: ‘The general principles of the classification and labelling of substances and preparations shall be applied according to the criteria in Annex VI, save where contrary requirements for dangerous preparations are specified in separate Directives’ (the italics are mine). Finally, Article 5 (1) of Directive 67/548/EEC, as amended, provides that ‘(1) The Member States shall take all the measures necessary to ensure that without prejudice to Article 8 substances cannot be placed on the market on their own or in preparations unless the substances have been: — notified to the competent authority of one of the Member States in accordance with this directive, — packaged and labelled in accordance with Articles 15 to 18 and with the criteria in Annex VI, and in accordance with the results of the tests provided for in Article 6’ (the italics are mine). For the reasons set out above, it appears that those provisions do not extend the scope of the directive to preparations generally. (a) Article 5 (1), to which the national court specifically refers, can only concern new substances not yet marketed when the directive entered into force. Besides the mention of marketing contained in the text itself, reference must also be made to the third recital in the preamble to Directive 79/831, which expressly refers to ‘new substances’ and the notification which must be given to the competent authorities that they are to be placed on the market. By virtue of Article 1 (4) (a) of Directive 67/548/EEC as amended, Articles 5, 6 and 7 of the directive do not apply to substances listed in an inventory of substances on the Community market drawn up by the Commission under Article 13. That inventory was drawn up on 18 September 1981. Polychlorinated biphenyls, already mentioned in Council Directive 76/769/EEC (see sixth, seventh and eighth recitals of the preamble) cannot be regarded as new substances. Consequently, the provisions laid down in Article 5 (1) are not applicable to them. (b) Article 2 (1) merely makes it possible to distinguish substances from preparations. As I have already said, Article 4 (2) deals with the criteria for assessing the hazard presented by preparations containing dangerous substances, and, moreover, is merely in the nature of a general ‘programme’. (c) All that remains to be considered is Article 3 (3). That provision lays down general criteria for the classification and labelling of substances and preparations by referring to the criteria in Annex VI of the directive ‘save where contrary requirements for dangerous preparations are specified in separate directives’. Part II (B) defining corrosion and irritation criteria and Part II (D) containing the ‘guide for the labelling of dangerous substances’ (the italics are mine) of Annex VI (the title of which refers solely to substances) were extensively revised by Commission Directive 83/467/EEC (Official Journal L 257 of 15 September 1983). However, as the national court noted, Parts II (B) and II (D) lay down general criteria for the classification and labelling of both substances and preparations. It should also be noted that Points 5.2 (a) and (c) of Part II (D) (Annex III of Directive 83/467/EEC) expressly refer to separate directives dealing with preparations. However, as the Commission has clearly shown, there is a connection between Directive 67/548/EEC as amended and the three special directives which repeat many provisions contained in the former. Having regard to the fact that the scope of Directive 67/548/EEC is restricted in regard to labelling to dangerous substances, it must be concluded that the rules laid down in Annex VI concerning the labelling of dangerous preparations will only be binding when a separate directive is adopted implementing the general provisions laid down in the general directive on substances. If any doubt remains on the subject, it will be dispelled by recalling that a general directive is being prepared on the classification, packaging and labelling of preparations, which would only be justified if that area was not already regulated. (d) Finally, above and beyond the legal arguments, the Commission advanced a number of pertinent technical arguments. The most important appears to be that the physical and chemical properties of a dangerous substance and those of a preparation containing that substance are not necessarily the same since such a substance may no longer be dangerous when incorporated into a preparation. If the labelling measures laid down in Articles 15 to 18 of Directive 67/548/EEC as amended were applied to all preparations containing dangerous substances in spite of the fact that the criteria referred to in Article 4 (2) have not yet been laid down, it would be necessary to mention the presence of infinitely tiny impurities, which would give rise to results both absurd and contrary to the objective to be attained.