No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Registration Requirements for Monomer Substances Integrated in Polymers under the REACH-Regulation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2017
Abstract
1. The concept of ‘monomer substances’ in Article 6 (3) of 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, relates only to reacted monomers which are integrated in polymers (official headnote).
2. Article 6 (3) of Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006 infringes neither the principle of proportionality nor the principle of equal treatment (author's headnote).
- Type
- Case Notes
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010
References
** Editorial Hint: Article 2 (9) and Article 6 (3) Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH). OJ 2006, L 396/1, corrigendum OJ 2007, L 136, pp. 3–846.
1 OJ 2006 L 396/1 and corrigendum OJ 2007 L 136/3.
2 Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Case C-558/07, S.P.C.M. et al. v. Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 10 March 2009, paras. 20–22.
3 Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Case C-558/07, supra note 2, para. 20.
4 REACH-Regulation, supra note 1, Article 1.
5 Case C-558/07, S.P.M.C. et al. v. Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 7 July 2009, para. 2.
6 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 17; Opinion of the Advocate General Kokott, supra note 2, paras. 65–68.
7 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 38, 40, 72, 80–81.
8 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 20–21.
9 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 22.
10 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 23–24.
11 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 25–26.
12 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 29.
13 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 30–31.
14 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 33–34.
15 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 36.
16 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 42.
17 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 44–45.
18 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 49.
19 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 50–52.
20 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 52–53.
21 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 54–55.
22 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 59–63.
23 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 62.
24 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 64–71.
25 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 67.
26 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, paras. 73–80.
27 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 74.
28 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 78.
29 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 79.
30 Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Case C-558/07, supra note 2, paras. 80–100, esp. para. 84.
31 For the likeliness of such a situation see the arguments put forward by the Commission before the WTO-Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, minutes G/TBT/M/41 of June 2008 of the meeting of the WTO-Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade of 21 March 2007, point 40.
32 Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Case C-558/07, supra note 2, para. 109.
33 Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Case C-558/07, supra note 2, para. 107.
34 Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Case C-558/07, supra note 2, paras. 110–113.
35 Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Case C-558/07, supra note 2, para. 115.
36 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 53.
37 Case C-558/07, supra note 5, para. 55.