Confédération Paysanne and Others v. Premier Ministre and Ministre De L'Agriculture, De L'Agroalimentaire Et De La Forêt (C.J.E.U.)

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (6) ◽  
pp. 1281-1298
Author(s):  
Hans-Georg Dederer
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Regulatory Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice

On July 25, 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU, the Court) rendered its judgment in the case C-528/16, Confédération paysanne and Others. It is a landmark decision in that the Court essentially decided that genome-edited organisms are “genetically modified organisms” (GMOs) governed by the EU's regulatory framework on GMOs without exception.

Research on Safety Hazard Control of Genetically Modified Organisms Based on Compensation Laws

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chensong Fei
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Safety Hazards ◽  
Safety Hazard ◽  
Existing Problems ◽  
Hazard Control

In this paper, we firstly analyzed the categories and characteristics of safety hazards of genetically modified organisms. Then, we summarized and compared the laws on safety hazard compensation for genetically modified organisms in the United States, the European Union and China. Finally, suggestions were put forward to solve the existing problems in compensation laws in China so as to ensure the healthy and orderly development of China's genetically modified biological industry. 

scholarly journals THE EUROPEAN UNION, THE UNITED STATES, AND THE GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS (GMOs)

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-20
Author(s):  
Anisa ◽  
Chelsilya ◽  
Grace Yohana ◽  
Mucco Eva ◽  
Morry Zefanya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
The United States ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Eu

Current technological advances have been present in all aspects of human life, including technological advances in biotechnology. Biotechnology not only raises hope for science but also raises heated debates among scientists, especially between the European Union and the US. This debate arises because of differences in perspective between the EU and the US. The EU has stringent rules regarding the development efforts of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). At the same time, the US thinks that GMOs are part of agriculture, so there is no need for any special laws to regulate them. Various side effects also come hand in hand with the birth of GMOs. They are ranging from adverse effects on human health, the health of food products, and even environmental damage. The development of GMOs can damage the ecosystem of species that exist in the environment. Still, more complex problems arise due to GMOs like economic problems and monopolies.   Keywords: The  GMOs, The EU, The US.

scholarly journals ОБИМ СУБЈЕКТИВНОГ ПРАВА НА ЖИГ У ПРАВУ ЕВРОПСКЕ УНИЈЕ

TEME ◽  
2017 ◽  
pp. 193
Author(s):  
Vukašin Petrović
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
Regulatory Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Concrete Case ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Likelihood Of Confusion ◽  
The Individual

In this paper, we analyze the appropriate regulatory framework of the European Union which is related to the issue of the scope of trade mark, i.e. its application in practice, through appropriate judgements of the Court of Justice of the European Union. More particularly, the focus of the analysis is on the factors on the basis of which the scope of trade mark as a subjective right is determined, i.e. the limits of protection acquired by the concrete trade mark. In that sense, this paper will aim to provide a detailed view of, primarily, the concept of likelihood of confusion which represents the key element for determining the scope of trade mark as a subjective right, through the view of the individual elements from which it consists, i.e. on the basis of which the existence of the mentioned likelihood is determined in each concrete case.

Genetically Modified Organisms

2019 ◽  
pp. 508-530
Author(s):  
Anne Saab
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
European Union ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Gm Foods ◽  
Product Regulation

This chapter examines comparative approaches to risk assessment and regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It first provides a brief background on the emergence, increased use, and controversy surrounding GMOs as well as the important legal questions and complexities they raise before discussing the legal approaches used to assess and regulate risks associated with GM foods, labelling of GM foods, and the application of intellectual property rights (IPRs) to GMOs. In particular, it considers risk assessment in the United States and in the European Union, focusing on the precautionary approach versus the permissive approach. It also compares process regulation and product regulation for regulating the risks posed by GMOs in the United States and the European Union, along with risk assessment and regulation in Brazil, China, and Costa Rica. Finally, it analyses the legal framework for IPRs as they apply to GMOs and comparative approaches to patenting GMOs.

Indicating Reasons for National GM “Opt-Outs”: The Way Forward or a Dead End Street?

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karolina Zurek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Economic Importance ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Flexible Approach ◽  
Dead End

Cautious skepticism rather than euphoric joy surrounds the activities of the European Commission developing its new – flexible – approach towards cultivation of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). Following its announcement in the summer of 2010, new elements of the reform unravel at the beginning of 2011.GMO regulation has experienced a rather uneasy track in the European Union. The specificity of the sector, with its economic importance, its social controversies as well as the high levels of uncertainty as to the long-term effects, have all contributed to various political and regulatory troubles in Europe and worldwide. After the revision of the first wave of regulation in 2001-2003, the de facto moratorium, and ensuing conflicts under the WTO adjudication, the situation seemed to be settling down.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document