Case T-1/10: Action brought on 4 January 2010 — PPG and SNF v ECHA
Date: 2010-01-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Chemicals Agency, action for annulment (EU), chemical product, dangerous substance, disclosure of information, health risk








C_2010063EN.01004801.xml










13.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/48





Action brought on 4 January 2010 — PPG and SNF v ECHA
(Case T-1/10)
2010/C 63/85
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Polyelectrolyte Producers Group GEIE (PPG) (Bruxelles, Belgium), SNF SAS (Andrézieux, France) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem, P. Sellar and R. Cana, lawyers)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)

Form of order sought







—


declare the application admissible and well-founded;










—


annul the contested act;










—


order ECHA to pay the costs of these proceedings;










—


take such other or further measures as justice may require.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants seek the annulment of the decision of the European Chemicals Agency (‘ECHA’) of 7 December 2009 regarding the identification of acrylamide (EC No 201 — 173 — 7) as a substance meeting the criteria set out in Article 57 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1) (hereinafter ‘REACH’), in accordance with Article 59 of REACH.
On the basis of the contested decision, brought to the applicants attention by means of an ECHA press release of 7 December 2009, the substance acrylamide was included in the list of 15 new chemical substances of the Candidate list of substance of very high concern. The applicants argue that, as a result, they will be required to provide certain information relating to the level of acrylamide in their products which they sell to customers in order for those customers to comply with notification and information obligations imposed on them by REACH. Further, they may also be required to update the safety data sheets and/or communicate to their customers information on the identification of acrylamide as a substance of very high concern.
The applicants submit that the contested act is unlawful because it is based on an underlying assessment of acrylamide that is scientifically and legally flawed. According to their submissions the defendant committed manifest errors of appraisal in adopting the contested act. In particular, the applicants submit that the contested act infringes the applicable rules established for the identification of substances of very high concern under REACH.
In summary, the applicants claim that the contested act effectively identifies acrylamide as a substance of very high concern on the basis that acrylamide is a chemical substance. However, the applicants claim that acrylamide is used exclusively as an intermediate and is therefore exempt from Title VII concerning Authorisations of REACH, according to Articles 2(8) and 59 of the said Regulation.
Furthermore, the applicants put forward that the contested act was adopted without sufficient evidential basis and therefore, the defendant committed a manifest error of appraisal.
Finally, the applicants claim that the contested act infringes, besides the requirements of REACH, the principles of proportionality and equal treatment.


(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC (OJ 2006 L 396, p. 1)