Hold your pipettes: The European Court of Justice's findings in Confédération Paysanne & Others stirs GMOtions

Kathleen Garnett*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

In July 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) gave its final ruling on the much anticipated Confédération Paysanne & Others case on the regulation of mutagenic plants in the European Union (EU). Advocate General Bobek had opined that mutagenic techniques for the development of novel plant varieties should be exempted from the stringent provisions set out in the EU genetically modified organisms (GMO) Directive. It came as somewhat of a surprise, therefore, when the Court of Justice, in its final ruling, took a diametrically opposite point of view to that of the Advocate General, and concluded that novel mutagenic techniques must be subject to the provisions set out in the EU's various regulations relating to GMOs. The scientific community are now calling for the European Commission to consider new legislation to take account of novel plant breeding techniques. This case note sets out how the CJEU reached its conclusions, explains why the GMO Directive is not anti‐science and considers the important role that defining ‘natural’ within a legal context will play in the forthcoming debate on science, innovation and novel plant breeding techniques.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)349-355
JournalReview of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law
Volume28
Issue number3
Early online date17 Jun 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2019

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Hold your pipettes: The European Court of Justice's findings in Confédération Paysanne & Others stirs GMOtions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this