Alliance for Natural Health & Anor, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Health & Anor (Approximation of laws) [2005] EUECJ C-154/04 (12 July 2005)

Alliance for Natural Health & Anor, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Health & Anor (Approximation of laws) [2005] EUECJ C-154/04 (12 July 2005)

Articles 3, 4(1), and 15(b) of Directive 2002/46/EC are valid. They were lawfully adopted under Article 95 EC to address obstacles to the internal market caused by divergent national rules on food supplements. The restrictions imposed are justified by the objective of protecting human health, are proportionate, respect subsidiarity and equal treatment, do not infringe fundamental rights, and are accompanied by adequate procedures for amending the positive lists. The obligation to state reasons was satisfied.

Citation
[2005] EUECJ C-154/04
Parties
Claimant: National Association of Health Stores and Health Food Manufacturers Ltd; Claimant: Alliance for Natural Health and Nutri-Link Ltd; Referring Court: High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court)
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
12 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling (references for Validity) / Judgment on Validity of Directive 2002/46/ec Articles 3, 4(1), 15(b)
Outcome
Validity upheld; provisions not invalid.
Legal Topics
Validity of EU Directives, Internal Market, Free Movement of Goods, Subsidiarity, Proportionality, Equal Treatment, Fundamental Rights, Obligation to State Reasons
European Union Law Administrative Law Food Law Validity of EU Directives Internal Market Free Movement of Goods Subsidiarity Proportionality +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Association of Health Stores and Health Food Manufacturers Ltd

Claimant

Alliance for Natural Health and Nutri-Link Ltd

Claimant

High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court)

Referring Court

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Ruling (references for Validity) / Judgment on Validity of Directive 2002/46/ec Articles 3, 4(1), 15(b)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Articles 3, 4(1), and 15(b) of Directive 2002/46/EC are invalid for lack of legal basis, infringement of free movement of goods, subsidiarity, proportionality, equal treatment, fundamental rights, or failure to state reasons.

Ratio Decidendi

Articles 3, 4(1), and 15(b) of Directive 2002/46/EC are valid. They were lawfully adopted under Article 95 EC to address obstacles to the internal market caused by divergent national rules on food supplements. The restrictions imposed are justified by the objective of protecting human health, are proportionate, respect subsidiarity and equal treatment, do not infringe fundamental rights, and are accompanied by adequate procedures for amending the positive lists. The obligation to state reasons was satisfied.

Court Disposition

Validity upheld; provisions not invalid.

Orders

  • Articles 3, 4(1), and 15(b) of Directive 2002/46/EC are not invalid for any of the reasons alleged.