Case C-147/21, CIHEF and Others: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 19 January 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — France) — Comité interprofessionnel des huiles essentielles françaises (CIHEF) and Others v Ministre de la Transition écologique, Premier ministre (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Biocidal products — Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 — Article 72 — Free movement of goods — Article 34 TFEU — Possibility for Member States to adopt restrictive measures on commercial and advertising practices — Selling arrangements falling outside the scope of Article 34 TFEU — Whether justified — Article 36 TFEU — Objective of protecting human and animal health and the environment — Proportionality)
Date: 2023-01-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: advertising, approximation of laws, biocide, environmental protection, free movement of goods, market approval, principle of proportionality, public health, restriction on competition








C_2023083EN.01000302.xml










6.3.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 83/3






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 19 January 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — France) — Comité interprofessionnel des huiles essentielles françaises (CIHEF) and Others v Ministre de la Transition écologique, Premier ministre
(Case C-147/21, (1) CIHEF and Others)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Biocidal products - Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 - Article 72 - Free movement of goods - Article 34 TFEU - Possibility for Member States to adopt restrictive measures on commercial and advertising practices - Selling arrangements falling outside the scope of Article 34 TFEU - Whether justified - Article 36 TFEU - Objective of protecting human and animal health and the environment - Proportionality)
(2023/C 83/04)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Comité interprofessionnel des huiles essentielles françaises (CIHEF), Florame, Hyteck Aroma-Zone, Laboratoires Gilbert, Laboratoire Léa Nature, Laboratoires Oméga Pharma France, Pierre Fabre Médicament, Pranarom France, Puressentiel France

Defendants: Ministre de la Transition écologique, Premier ministre

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 72 of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products, as amended by Regulation (EU) No 334/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014, must be interpreted as meaning that:






—


it precludes national legislation which requires the affixing of a statement, in addition to that prescribed in that article, to advertisements addressed to professionals for biocidal products of product-types 2 and 4, included in group 1 of those product-types, listed in Annex V to that regulation, as well as of product-types 14 and 18, included in group 3 of those product-types, listed in Annex V to the said regulation;










—


and that it does not preclude national legislation which prohibits advertising addressed to the general public for biocidal products of product-types 2 and 4, included in group 1 of those product-types, listed in Annex V to Regulation No 528/2012, as amended by Regulation No 334/2014, as well as of product-types 14 and 18, included in group 3 of those product-types, listed in Annex V to that regulation.














2.


Articles 34 and 36 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that:






—


they do not preclude national legislation which prohibits certain commercial practices such as discounts, price reductions, rebates, the differentiation of general and specific sales conditions, the gift of free units or any equivalent practices, relating to biocidal products of product-types 14 and 18, included in group 3 of those product-types, listed in Annex V to Regulation No 528/2012, as amended by Regulation No 334/2014, provided that that legislation is justified by objectives of protection of the health and life of humans and of the environment, that it is suitable for securing the attainment of those objectives and that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain them, which is for the referring court to verify;










—


and that they do not preclude national legislation which prohibits advertising addressed to the general public for biocidal products of product-types 2 and 4, included in group 1 of those product-types, listed in Annex V to that regulation, as well as of product-types 14 and 18, included in group 3 of those product-types, listed in Annex V to the said regulation, provided that that legislation is justified by objectives of protection of the health and life of humans and of the environment, that it is suitable for securing the attainment of those objectives and that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain them, which is for the referring court to verify.










(1)  OJ C 215, 29.6.2020.