| Abstrakt: |
In this article, the authors analyse the recent Parliament v Commission judgment on chromium trioxide, in light of previous case law on the authorisation procedure under the Regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals ('REACH'). In the second part of the article, the authors then explore the future of the authorisation procedure, in the context of the current REACH revision, and what it could mean for the Commission's future new decision on chromium trioxide following the Parliament v Commission judgment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
