Andreas Meisterernst, Anna Neusch

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 17 (2022), Issue 3, Page 202 - 207

The number of product recalls in the EU due to findings of 2-Chloroethanol (2CE) had reached as high as 10.000 by the summer of 2021 and, up to now, more than 900 Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) notifications have been made. 2CE has inconclusive data on genotoxic or carcinogenic properties. Therefore, the European Commission suggested that Member States choose a zero-tolerance approach. This meant that any product containing 2CE or products containing an ingredient known to be contaminated with 2CE – regardless of whether or not 2CE was still detectable there – should be withdrawn from the EU market and recalled from consumers. This decision was based on the precautionary principle contained in Art. 7 of the General Food Law (GFL), among others. The following article examines the zero-tolerance approach with regard to its legal justification.

Andreas Meisterernst, Anna Neusch

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 17 (2022), Issue 5, Page 338 - 342

How authorities dealt with findings of 2-Chloroethanol (2CE) in food during the ‘Ethyleneoxide crisis’ was the subject of several recent court decisions in Germany. Three of the four Higher Administrative Courts involved at last instance took the view that the precautionary principle in Art. 7 General Food Law (GFL) had been violated. The following article will take a closer look at the main arguments of the leading decision by the Higher Administrative Court of Bavaria and will also explain why the dissenting decision by the Higher Administrative Court of Hamburg is not to be followed.

Anna Neusch, Anne-Marie Orth, Andreas Meisterernst

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 16 (2021), Issue 3, Page 188 - 201

The fight against the extension of the authorisation of glyphosate as a plant protection product activated NGOs from 2014 onwards. Numerous accusations were made against the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, which was involved in the approval process, and the work of the EFSA. More or less explicitly, the regulatory authorities were accused of cronyism with industry. The citizens' initiative to ban glyphosate that was subsequently submitted to the Commission in 2017, as well as the considerable media bombardment, led to the Commission attempting to go on the offensive with the Transparency Regulation. New regulations on risk communication and the transparent functioning of EFSA were intended to take the wind out of the sails of future criticism. The new regulations in this regard will apply from 27.3.2021. The following article deals with the effects of the new regulations on application procedures at EFSA, some clarified and several still open questions.