The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has rejected an action brought by Plastics Europe attempting to reverse the designation by ECHA of the plastic additive / monomer BPA (Bisphenol A) as an endocrine disrupting chemical (EDC), requiring Plastics Europe to pay the costs of ECHA and of the NGO ClientEarth. This is the second time that ECJ has rejected an appeal against the inclusion by ECHA of BPA in the Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC), with a third appeal (on environmental impact) expect to be heard soon. The detailed (224 point) ECJ judgement upholds ECHA’s legal assessment of the substance, and discusses the meaning and interpretation of terms such as scientific evidence, inconsistencies, risk, probable effects and plausible link, endocrine disruptor, mode of action vs. mechanism of action, safe level of concentration, proportionality, legal certainty. This may prove relevant jurisprudence for future designations of chemicals to the SVHC Candidate List (see list of flame retardants currently on this list above).
European Court of Justice, General Court, 5th Chamber, 20th September 2019, Case T636/17, “REACH — Establishment of a list of substances identified with a view to their eventual inclusion inAnnex XIV of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Supplement to the entry relating to the substance bisphenolA on that list — Articles 57 and 59 of Regulation No 1907/2006 — Manifest error of assessment — Legalcertainty — Legitimate expectations — Proportionality)” http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=217994&mode=req&pageIndex=1&dir=&occ=first&part=1&text=&doclang=EN&cid=7994