CELEX: 62021CN0162
Language: en
Date: 2021-03-11 00:00:00
Title: Case C-162/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (Belgium) lodged on 11 March 2021 — Pesticide Action Network Europe ASBL, Nature et Progrès Belgique ASBL, TN v État belge, represented by the Ministre des Classes moyennes, des Indépendants, des P.M.E., de l’Agriculture et de l’Intégration sociale, chargé des Grandes villes

21.6.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 242/6
            
         
      Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (Belgium) lodged on 11 March 2021 — Pesticide Action Network Europe ASBL, Nature et Progrès Belgique ASBL, TN v État belge, represented by the Ministre des Classes moyennes, des Indépendants, des P.M.E., de l’Agriculture et de l’Intégration sociale, chargé des Grandes villes
      (Case C-162/21)
      (2021/C 242/08)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Referring court
      
      Conseil d’État
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicants: Pesticide Action Network Europe ASBL, Nature et Progrès Belgique ASBL, TN
      
         Defendant: État belge, represented by the Ministre des Classes moyennes, des Indépendants, des P.M.E., de l’Agriculture et de l’Intégration sociale, chargé des Grandes villes
      
         Questions referred
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Is Article 53 of 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 (1) to be interpreted as allowing a Member State to grant, in certain circumstances, an authorisation for the treatment, sale or sowing of seeds treated with plant protection products?
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, can the aforementioned Article 53 be applied, in certain circumstances, to plant protection products containing active substances the marketing or use of which is restricted or prohibited in the territory of the European Union?
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Do the ‘special circumstances’ required by Article 53 of the aforementioned regulation cover situations in which the occurrence of a danger is not certain but only plausible?
               
            
                  4.
               
               
                  Do the ‘special circumstances’ required by Article 53 of the aforementioned regulation cover situations in which the occurrence of a danger is foreseeable, common and even cyclical?
               
            
                  5.
               
               
                  Is the expression ‘which cannot be contained by any other reasonable means’, as used in Article 53 of the regulation, to be interpreted as giving equal importance, in the light of the wording of recital 8 of the regulation, on the one hand, to ensuring a high level of protection of both human and animal health and the environment and, on the other hand, to safeguarding the competitiveness of Community agriculture?
               
            
         (1)  OJ 2009 L 309, p. 1.