Phlebotomists are health care workers who are specially trained to take blood.

Skip to: Content | Sidebar | Footer

European Commission

8 April, 2014 (04:40) | General | By:

Who 1924/2006 dealing with the regulation, which will quickly realize that many of the requested or submitted health-related statements for food of the European Commission are not admitted. Here the question arises, whether appeals against the decisions of the Commission are. There is a consensus about that issued by Commission decisions by annulment before the European Court of first instance can be taken against the individual companies. Against the previous reviews of the European food safety authority the courts not available but probably, also filed a lawsuit against the yet to adopted Community list of permitted health claims might be difficult. The best chance of success are therefore, if individual decisions of the Commission are attacked. Surprisingly so far few companies have dared”, legal action to challenge the judgment against them. As far as can be seen, a company against a Commission decision on the regulation has so far only 1924/2006 charged with. The company Clasado has filed suit at the 30.07.2011 against the Commission.

The company sought to explain the parts of the EU regulations concerning them null and void where it comes to the health claims, admitted has applied for the company in relation to their product. The relevant product is a pre biotisches dietary supplement to support the immune system and promote a healthy digestion in humans, as well as to reduce the risk of travel diarrhoea, requested the Commission has rejected the application by legal regulations. The affected company argued as follows: firstly the Commission, when adopting the relevant regulations have left an essential procedural requirement aside, namely can for the company and the public, according to the Regulation No. 1924/2006 comment. Secondly, the Commission have so that also rules in Regulation (EC) violated no.

178 / 20024, should ensure that the European food safety authority exercises its activities with a high degree of transparency. Also the adoption of the question is based on an error of law, because in them the additional versions of the European food safety authority to requests rather than opinion or a part of the opinion in the Regulation No. 1924/2006 been viewed are. In addition, were adopted the contested regulations of the Commission in violation of law of the applicant from the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Unio5, to be heard, and in violation of their legitimate expectation. Finally, the Commission had infringed the right to a good administration where it involves a general principle of law, which was common to the constitutional traditions of the Member States, and in particular their obligation as Gallup after Regulation No 1924/2006, to examine the documents presented to her carefully and independently. The European Court of first instance is now need to decide whether these objections put forth by the undertaking concerned is correct and therefore annulled the decisions of the Commission. Eagerly, you shouldn’t expect the outcome of the proceedings, because it affects the defense strategies of others by the regulation of 1924/2006 affected companies. Other non-binding and free information relating to food law, see