Case C-111/16: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 September 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Udine — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Giorgio Fidenato, Leandro Taboga, Luciano Taboga (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Agriculture — Genetically modified food and feed — Emergency measures — National measure seeking to prohibit the cultivation of genetically modified maize MON 810 — Maintenance or renewal of the measure — Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 — Article 34 — Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 — Articles 53 and 54 — Conditions of application — Precautionary principle)
Date: 2017-09-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, European Commission, animal feedingstuffs, food safety, foodstuff, foodstuffs legislation, health control, health risk, maize, transgenic plant








C_2017382EN.01001601.xml










13.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 382/16





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 September 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Udine — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Giorgio Fidenato, Leandro Taboga, Luciano Taboga
(Case C-111/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Agriculture - Genetically modified food and feed - Emergency measures - National measure seeking to prohibit the cultivation of genetically modified maize MON 810 - Maintenance or renewal of the measure - Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 - Article 34 - Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 - Articles 53 and 54 - Conditions of application - Precautionary principle))
(2017/C 382/18)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Udine

Parties in the criminal proceedings comprising the main proceedings

Giorgio Fidenato, Leandro Taboga, Luciano Taboga

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 34 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed, read in conjunction with Article 53 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety, must be interpreted as meaning that the European Commission is not required to adopt emergency measures within the meaning of Article 53 of Regulation No 178/2002 when a Member State officially informs the Commission, in accordance with Article 54(1) of that regulation, of the need to take such measures, as long as it is not evident that products authorised by Regulation No 1829/2003 or in accordance with that regulation are likely to constitute a serious risk to human health, animal health or the environment.










2.


Article 34 of Regulation No 1829/2003, read in conjunction with Article 54 of Regulation No 178/2002, must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State may, after officially informing the European Commission of the need to resort to emergency measures, and where the Commission has not acted in accordance with Article 53 of Regulation No 178/2002, first, adopt such measures at the national level and, second, maintain or renew such measures, so long as the Commission has not adopted, in accordance with Article 54(2) of that regulation, a decision requiring their extension, amendment or abrogation.










3.


Article 34 of Regulation No 1829/2003, read in conjunction with the precautionary principle as set out in Article 7 of Regulation No 178/2002, must be interpreted as meaning that it does not give Member States the option of adopting, in accordance with Article 54 of Regulation No 178/2002, interim emergency measures solely on the basis of that principle, without the conditions set out in Article 34 of Directive No 1829/2003 being satisfied.






(1)  OJ C 191, 30.5.2016.