Case T-763/25: Action brought on 3 November 2025 – Bündnis für eine enkeltaugliche Landwirtschaft v Commission
Date: 2025-11-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: market approval, plant health control, plant health product








C_202506655EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6655


22.12.2025






Action brought on 3 November 2025 – Bündnis für eine enkeltaugliche Landwirtschaft v Commission


(Case T-763/25)

(C/2025/6655)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Bündnis für eine enkeltaugliche Landwirtschaft eV (Lassan, Germany) (represented by: R. Klinger and C. Douhaire, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the defendant of 8 July 2025 with reference Ares(2025)5510328 – 08/07/2025, which was communicated in German on 3 September 2025;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging incorrect refusal of the request for internal review of the failure to withdraw approval of an active substance under Article 21(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, (1) a non-renewal of approval regulation pursuant to Article 20(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 or the inadmissibility of the adoption of emergency measures pursuant to Article 69 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 in relation to Fluopyram.










—


The applicant submits that the interpretation and application of Article 21(1) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, read in conjunction with the first subparagraph of Article 10(1) and Article 2(1)(h) of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006, to the effect that the failure to withdraw approval of an active substance pursuant to Article 21(3) of Regulation No 1107/2009 cannot form the subject matter of a request for internal review, are incorrect.










—


The applicant submits that the interpretation and application of the second subparagraph of Article 10(1), read in conjunction with Article 2(h) of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 (2) to the effect that the request for internal review of the failure to take measures under Article 21(3), Article 20(1)(b) or Article 69 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 was time-barred is incorrect. The refusal of the request to terminate the approval of fluopyram ought to be regarded as the event which triggers the time limit. By submitting the request for internal review on 5 November 2024, the time limit set out in the second subparagraph of Article 10(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 was complied with.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging incorrect refusal of the request for internal review of the failure to adopt measures pursuant to Article 21(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 on the basis that it is unfounded.
– The applicant claims that under Article 21(1) and (3), read in conjunction with Article 6(f) and Article 4(1) and (3)(b), (c) and (e) of, and point 3.10 of Annex II to, Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, read in conjunction with Article 191(2) TFEU, the Commission is obliged to review and withdraw the approval of fluopyram.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging incorrect refusal of the request for internal review of the failure to adopt measures pursuant to Article 20(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 on the basis that it is unfounded.
– The applicant claims that under Article 20(1)(b), read in conjunction with Article 6(f) and Article 4(1), (3)(b), (c) and (e) of, and point 3.10 of Annex II to, Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, read in conjunction with Article 191(2) TFEU, there is an obligation not to renew the approval of fluopyram.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging incorrect refusal of the request for internal review of the failure adopt measures pursuant to Article 69 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 on the basis that it is unfounded.
– According to the applicant, the requirements laid down in Article 69 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 have also been satisfied, given that fluopyram poses serious risks to the environment, in particular to groundwater.






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC (OJ 2009 L 309, p. 1).

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies (OJ 2006 L 264 p. 13).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6655/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)