Ecolex Logo
Le portail au
droit de l'environnement
Résultats de la recherche » Jurisprudence

Nickel Institute v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

Pays/Territoire
Union européenne
Type de cour
Cour internationale
Date
Jul 21, 2011
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Nom du tribunal
European Court of Justice
Siège de la cour
Luxembourg
Juge
Prechal, A.
Jarašiūnas, E.
Bonichot, J.-C.
Bay Larsen (Rapporteur), L.
Toader, C.
Numéro de référence
C-14/10
Langue
Anglais
Sujet
Déchets et substances dangereuses
Mot clé
Substances dangereuses
Résumé
The present case concerned the classification of certain nickel and borate substances as hazardous under the Directive 67/548 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances and Regulation No 790/2009 amending, for the purposes of its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation No 1272/2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures. The Commission had classified the substances under Directive 67/548. The classifications were challenged on a number of grounds, many of them technical. The Court, dismissing all the arguments, confirmed earlier ECJ case law holding that the Commission has a broad discretion in this area (in particular as to the assessment of highly complex scientific and technical facts) and that the Court should not substitute its assessment for that of the Commission. It had been argued inter alia that, in classifying the substances, the Commission had failed to consider the risks posed during normal handling or use by substances which are never handled or used outside a laboratory and had wrongly relied on tests carried out on animals to which a substance had been administered orally, although normal handling or use of that substance in humans does not involve a risk of exposure by ingestion. The Court dismissed those arguments on the basis that they confused assessment of the hazards associated with a substance with assessment of the risks that its handling or use may create. Thus, an assessment of the hazards linked to the substances' intrinsic properties must not be limited in light of specific circumstances of use, as in the case of a risk assessment, and may be properly carried out regardless of the place where the substance is used (in a laboratory or elsewhere), the route by which contact with the substance might arise and the possible levels of exposure to the substance. It also dismissed arguments that the Commission had failed to accord sufficient importance to epidemiological data, incorrectly assumed that animal data could be extrapolated to humans and infringed the principle of proportionality by classifying the substances pending new epidemiological studies.
Texte intégral
COU159037.pdf
Site web
curia.europa.eu