EU Court to Address Biocidal Product Regulation in Speyer & Grund GmbH v Werner & Mertz GmbH Case

The case, formally known as Case C-473/24, stems from a legal dispute in Germany over the interpretation of certain provisions in Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, which governs the market availability and use of biocidal products in the EU. Speyer & Grund GmbH, the defendant, and Werner & Mertz GmbH, the plaintiff, have raised questions regarding the categorisation and regulatory scope of products intended for both biocidal and non-biocidal purposes.

Key Questions Referred for Ruling

The Bundesgerichtshof has referred five questions to the ECJ, each addressing specific elements of EU biocidal product regulation. The primary issues focus on whether a product's intended use as a biocide must be its sole or primary purpose to qualify under EU biocidal regulations. Additionally, questions are raised about the overlap between biocidal and food safety regulations, especially in cases where a product serves both purposes.

Key questions include:

1. Primary Purpose Requirement: Should a product's biocidal function be the sole or primary purpose to fall under Regulation (EU) No 528/2012?
2. Scope of Food Safety Regulations: How should products used in food hygiene, specifically those intended for cleaning food, be classified under biocidal product regulations?
3. Regulatory Overlap with Food Hygiene Law: Does Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on food hygiene apply exclusively to certain biocidal products?
4. Area Exception in Classification and Labelling Regulations: The court must clarify if products with a dual purpose (both food and biocidal) fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on classification, labelling, and packaging of substances.
5. REACH Regulation Implications: The case raises whether the REACH regulation (Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006) applies to products used as biocides within the food sector despite its area exceptions.

Implications for EU Biocidal Product Regulation

The ECJ's ruling on these questions will have broad implications for EU companies that manufacture, market, or use biocidal products, particularly those with food or hygiene applications. A decision confirming the necessity of a primary biocidal purpose could restrict the classification of dual-purpose products, while a ruling allowing secondary purposes may expand regulatory scope under Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.

Industry and Consumer Impact

If the ECJ adopts a stricter interpretation, it could lead to additional regulatory requirements and potential market limitations for products that serve both biocidal and non-biocidal roles. This decision will affect manufacturers, who may need to reassess product formulations and labelling, and regulators, who may need to enforce compliance differently across food and hygiene-related product categories.

As the ECJ considers these pivotal questions, the upcoming judgment will clarify the intersection of EU biocidal and food safety laws, setting a precedent that could reshape regulatory approaches in the EU’s biocidal and food safety sectors.