bg es cs da de et el en fr hr ga it lv lt hu mt nl pl pt ro sk sl fi sv

However, since that method has not been published in the Official Journal of the European Union, it is not binding on the public generally, for example on associations for the protection of consumers’ health

In July and August 2018, the Stichting Rookpreventie Jeugd (Youth Smoking Prevention Foundation, Netherlands) and 14 other entities (‘the applicants’) made a request for an order to the Nederlandse Voedsel- en Warenautoriteit (Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority). They requested that authority, first, to ensure that filter cigarettes offered for sale to consumers in the Netherlands comply, when used as intended, with the maximum emission levels for tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide prescribed by Directive 2014/40 1 and, second, to order manufacturers, importers and distributors of tobacco products to withdraw from the market filter cigarettes allegedly not complying with those emission levels.

The applicants challenged the decision rejecting that request by bringing an administrative objection before the State Secretary. After that objection was rejected, the applicants brought an action before the Rechtbank Rotterdam (District Court, Rotterdam, Netherlands). They submitted that Article 4(1) of Directive 2014/40 2 does not require recourse to a particular method of measuring emission levels and that it is clear, inter alia, from several studies that another measurement method (the ‘Canadian Intense’ method) should be applied in order to determine the precise emission levels for filter cigarettes used as intended.

The District Court, Rotterdam, made a reference to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling concerning, inter alia, the validity of Article 4(1) of Directive 2014/40 having regard to the principle of transparency, 3 to a number of provisions of EU law 4 and to the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. 5