Wet gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden ruling triggers €1.6m confiscation order

The court concluded that the company benefited financially from placing unauthorised plant protection products on the EU market and from falsifying origin and supplier documentation. The unlawfully obtained advantage was ultimately set at just over €1.6 million, payable to the Dutch state.

Article 20 Wgb and EU Regulation 1107/2009

At the centre of the case was Article 20(1) of the Wet gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden, which prohibits placing plant protection products on the Dutch market without authorisation in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

The court reaffirmed that a product is considered placed on the market once it is customs-cleared within the European Union. Arguments that certain bulk consignments fell outside the regulatory scope were rejected. According to the judges, the decisive factor is the composition and intended use of the product, not the packaging format.

This interpretation has practical consequences for importers, toll manufacturers, parallel traders and logistics providers handling technical active substances or formulated products destined for onward sale.

Forgery and economic benefit assessment

In addition to Wgb breaches, the company was convicted of falsifying certificates of origin and related commercial documentation. The court found that these documents facilitated trade flows and contributed directly to the profits realised.

Under Article 36e of the Dutch Criminal Code, the court assessed unlawfully obtained advantage by analysing revenue per order and deducting direct and indirect costs. The prosecution had initially sought more than €2.5 million, but the final confiscation amount was adjusted following an order-by-order review.

Compliance implications across the value chain

The Wet gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden enforcement action highlights that criminal fines are only part of the risk landscape. Confiscation proceedings can significantly exceed administrative penalties and may be pursued years after the underlying conduct.

Manufacturers, distributors, traders and downstream agricultural suppliers should take note. Robust authorisation checks, accurate origin documentation and transparent supply chain records are essential, particularly where re-export or contract formulation arrangements are involved.

Businesses active in cross-border agrochemical trade may wish to review historical transactions and current compliance frameworks to mitigate potential exposure under the Wet gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden.

Summary

The Rechtbank Gelderland has reinforced strict enforcement of the Wet gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden by ordering more than €1.6 million in profit confiscation for unauthorised market placement and document falsification. The ruling clarifies market placement principles and signals heightened financial risk for non-compliant operators.

FAQs

What does the Wet gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden require before placing products on the market?
The Wgb requires plant protection products to be authorised in accordance with EU Regulation 1107/2009 before they are placed on the Dutch or EU market. Customs clearance within the EU generally constitutes market placement unless a specific exemption applies.

Can authorities recover profits under the Wet gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden?
Yes. Following conviction, courts may confiscate unlawfully obtained gains under Article 36e of the Dutch Criminal Code. This can result in repayment orders significantly higher than criminal fines, particularly in cases involving sustained commercial activity.