PPWR self-assessment

Start now

EU General Court Restores ECHA THPS Supplier Listing Pending Main Case

Dr Steven Brennan
Dr Steven Brennan
3 min readAI-drafted, expert reviewed
Industrial water-treatment pipes and chemical dosing pumps

Key takeaway

What This Development Means

The EU General Court has rejected SNF Group's request to suspend ECHA's listing of a second tetrakis(hydroxymethyl)phosphonium sulphate supplier for product-type 12. The ruling cancels an earlier temporary suspension, so the listing operates while the main annulment action continues. Article 95 listing does not itself authorise individual biocidal products or their uses.

Did The General Court Finally Uphold ECHA's THPS Decision?

No. The Court rejected only the request for interim suspension because urgency was not established. The main annulment action remains pending, and the order did not decide the substantive legality of ECHA's supplier-listing decision.

Does An Article 95 Listing Authorise All THPS Products?

No. It confirms an eligible source for the specified active substance and product type. Finished products must still meet applicable authorisation or transitional rules, national market requirements, labels and conditions of use. Great Britain operates a separate Article 95 regime.

Source basis: Order of the President of the General Court of 14 September 2026, SNF Group v ECHA, Case T-244/26 R, CELEX 62026TO0244(01)

ECHA THPS Supplier Listing Resumes

The President of the EU General Court has rejected interim relief against an ECHA THPS supplier listing. The 14 September 2026 order in Case T-244/26 R cancels an earlier temporary suspension, allowing the European Chemicals Agency's 19 February 2026 decision to operate while the main case continues.

That decision added Reach Compliance Services Limited, acting for China's Hubei XingFa Chemicals Group Company Limited, as an authorised supplier of tetrakis(hydroxymethyl)phosphonium sulphate, known as THPS, for product-type 12 under Article 95 of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, the Biocidal Products Regulation.

What The Court Decided And Left Open

SNF Group, the participant supporting THPS in the review programme, argued that a new supplier could use previously protected data and cause serious commercial harm. The Court rejected the application because SNF had not established urgency. It did not decide whether the main action has a prima facie legal case or weigh the parties' interests.

The main annulment action, Case T-244/26, was brought on 20 April 2026 and remains pending. The interim order therefore does not validate every legal aspect of ECHA's decision and is not a final merits judgment.

The Court noted that THPS is a broad-spectrum biocide used in product-type 12, including slime control in the oil and gas sector, control of sulphate-reducing bacteria and protection against sour-gas corrosion. It also observed that the original Article 95 data-protection period ended on 31 December 2025 and that Regulation (EU) 2026/1165 created a compensation route for affected data owners.

What Applies To Suppliers And Users

Article 95 controls eligible active-substance and product suppliers. It does not itself approve THPS as an active substance for every use, authorise a finished biocidal product or displace the review programme's transitional arrangements. The Court expressly noted that Member States may continue national systems under Article 89(2), so market access can still vary.

The contested decision applies in the European Union and European Economic Area, not the United Kingdom. Great Britain has its own Article 95 regime, while Northern Ireland follows the relevant EU framework. Manufacturers, importers and formulators should therefore verify the listed supplier, product type, product authorisation or transitional status, and destination jurisdiction separately.

Analysis, clearly identified as an inference: the ruling reduces immediate supply concentration for THPS in product-type 12, but it does not eliminate legal uncertainty. Contracts should address the possibility that the pending annulment case changes the listing later, while avoiding language that treats an Article 95 entry as product approval.

Related Foresight coverage includes the EU Biocidal Products Regulation archive, an EU biocides compliance review and the separate GB Article 95 list process.

Get weekly regulatory updates:

Related Articles

Join 3,500+ professionals staying ahead

Subscribe to Foresight Weekly for expert-picked regulatory developments across chemicals, sustainability, product safety, ESG, and HSE.

Free forever. Unsubscribe anytime.

Read by professionals at

Boeing
AstraZeneca
Siemens
PepsiCo
SpaceX