Case ID. A violation of the right to equal protection under the law, or another form of discrimination. In that regard, as concerns respecting the essence of fundamental rights, it is clear that the prohibition on placing on the market tobacco products for oral use laid down in Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 is intended not to restrict the right to health but, on the contrary, to give expression to that right and, consequently, to ensure a high level of protection of health with respect to all consumers, by not entirely depriving people who want to stop smoking of a choice of products which would help them to achieve that goal. In England and Wales the Secretary of State for Health is responsible for the provision of a comprehensive national health service. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable. Ttrai, acting as Agents. Case C-210/03. Pine Valley Developments v Ireland (A/222) (1992) 14 EHRR 319, ECtHR. 4 - Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, 9 - Right to marry and right to found a family, 10 - Freedom of thought, conscience and religion, 11 - Freedom of expression and information, 12 - Freedom of assembly and of association, 15 - Freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work, 19 - Protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition, 22 - Cultural, religious and linguistic diversity, 26 - Integration of persons with disabilities, 27 - Workers' right to information and consultation within the undertaking, 28 - Right of collective bargaining and action, 29 - Right of access to placement services, 30 - Protection in the event of unjustified dismissal, 32 - Prohibition of child labour and protection of young people at work, 34 - Social security and social assistance, 36 - Access to services of general economic interest, 39 - Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at elections to the European Parliament, 40 - Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal elections, 45 - Freedom of movement and of residence, 47 - Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, 48 - Presumption of innocence and right of defence, 49 - Principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties, 50 - Right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence, EU Fundamental Rights Information System - EFRIS, Promising practices: equality data collection, Civil society and the Fundamental Rights Platform, NHRIs, Equality Bodies and Ombudsperson Institutions, UN, OSCE and other international organisations, From institutions to community living for persons with disabilities: perspectives from the ground, Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey Main results, Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey (EU-MIDIS II) Muslims, Together in the EU: Promoting the participation of migrants and their descendants, Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey (EU-MIDIS II) Roma, Child-friendly justice perspectives and experiences of professionals: Press pack, Jewish peoples experiences and perceptions of hate crime, discrimination and antisemitism, Child-friendly justice perspectives and experiences of children, Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language), Justice, victims rights and judicial cooperation. Accordingly, the criterion to be applied is not whether a measure adopted in such an area was the only or the best possible measure, since its legality can be affected only if the measure is manifestly inappropriate having regard to the objective which the competent institutions are seeking to pursue (see, to that effect, judgment of 4May 2016, Pillbox 38, C477/14, EU:C:2016:324, paragraph49). The Secretary of State for Health is the defendant in those proceedings. This is a list of experimental features that you can enable. Swedish Match AB v Secretary of State for Health Policy area Employment and social policy Deciding body type Court of Justice of the European Union Deciding body Court (First Chamber) Type Decision Decision date 22/11/2018 ECLI (European case law identifier) ECLI:EU:C:2018:938 EU Charter of Fundamental Rights EU Charter of Fundamental Rights [68] The matches are manufactured according to the European match standards EN 1783:1997. Moreover, Swedish Match claims that there is no evidence to support the idea that the consumption of tobacco products for oral use is a gateway that leads to smoking tobacco. Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. 2 European Communities Certain Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products, DS369, DS400, DS401. The prohibition of the sale of tobacco for oral use should be maintained in order to prevent the introduction in the Union (apart from Sweden) of a product that is addictive and has adverse health effects. C-477/14 Pillbox 38 (UK) Ltd v Secretary of State for Health EU:C:2016:324, [2016] 4 WLR 110, CJEU. It was thus open to the EU legislature, in the exercise of that discretion, to proceed towards harmonisation only in stages and to require only the gradual abolition of unilateral measures adopted by the Member States (judgment of 4May 2016, Philip Morris Brands and Others, C547/14, EU:C:2016:325, paragraph63). The interdependence of the two objectives pursued by that directive means that the EU legislature could legitimately take the view that it had to establish a set of rules for the placing on the EU market of tobacco products for oral use and that, because of that interdependence, that twofold objective could best be achieved at EU level (judgment of 4May 2016, Philip Morris Brands and Others, C547/14, EU:C:2016:325, paragraph222). In that regard, it follows from paragraph34 of the present judgment that Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 are not in breach of the principle of equal treatment on the ground that the treatment of tobacco products for oral use differs from the treatment of other tobacco and related products. Swedish Match I: Case C-210/03, R (Swedish Match AB) v Secretary of State for Health ( "Swedish Match I") EU:C:2004:802 was a challenge to Directive 2001/37/EC, which prohibited the sale of oral tobacco in UK, couldn't buy or sell unless it's Sweden. Publisher's summary: Confraternities were the most common form of organized religious life in medieval and early modern Europe. Nor can the prohibition be justified by the novelty of snus, since novel tobacco products are not prohibited by Directive 2014/40, under Article2(14) thereof, notwithstanding that there is no scientific track record and that those products may have potential adverse health effects. It follows that Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 are not in breach of the principle of subsidiarity. MADISON Gov. Don't forget to give your feedback! According to settled case-law, the principle of equal treatment requires that comparable situations must not be treated differently and that different situations must not be treated in the same way unless such treatment is objectively justified (judgment of 7March 2017, RPO, C390/15, EU:C:2017:174, paragraph41). Further, according to Swedish Match, the prohibition of tobacco products for oral use cannot be justified on public health grounds since the current scientific data, not available at the time of adoption of Council Directive 92/41/EEC of 15May 1992 amending Directive 89/622 (OJ 1992 L158, p.30), demonstrates that those products are at the lower end of the risk scale in terms of adverse health effects as compared with other smokeless tobacco products. Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes. In particular, Swedish Match and the NNA state, relying on observations made in Sweden and in Norway, that the consumption of snus tends to replace, rather than be additional to the consumption of tobacco products for smoking, and that it has no gateway effect to the latter products. Oct 20 (Reuters) - Marlboro maker Philip Morris International Inc (PM.N) on Thursday raised its buyout bid for Swedish Match AB (SWMA.ST) in a last-ditch effort to get backing for its $16 billion . Case C-151/17, Swedish Match AB v Secretary of State for Health, ECLI:EU: C:2018:938 The prohibition on the placing on the market of tobacco for oral use is not in breach of the EU general principles of non-discrimination, proportionality and subsidiarity, of Articles 296, 34 and 35 TFEU and of Articles 1, 7 and 35 of the Charter. Judgment (PDF) Press summary (PDF) Judgment on BAILII (HTML version) Consequently, the prohibition on the placing of tobacco products for oral use on the market does not manifestly exceed what is necessary in order to attain the objective of ensuring a high level of protection of public health. This right may also be called the right to free enterprise or economic freedom. That is not a necessary approach, as indicated by the fact that Directive 2014/40 itself leaves to the Member States a degree of discretion in the adoption of their legislation in relation to other tobacco products. 87) In that regard, Article 52(1) of the Charter provides that any limitation on the exercise of the rights and freedoms recognised by the Charter must be provided for by law and must respect the essence of those rights and freedoms. Even if the second of those objectives might be better achieved at the level of Member States, the fact remains that pursuing it at that level would be liable to entrench, if not create, situations in which, as stated in paragraph58 of the present judgment, some Member States permit the placing on the market of tobacco products for oral use, while other Member States prohibit it, thereby running completely counter to the first objective of Directive 2014/40, namely the improvement of the functioning of the internal market for tobacco and related products (judgment of 4May 2016, Philip Morris Brands and Others, C547/14, EU:C:2016:325, paragraph221). This includes both bans on false, misleading, deceptive packaging, as well as required health warnings on packaging. The Court further held, among other things, that: (1) adoption of the Directive was supported by sufficient scientific evidence; (2) the Directive satisfied the principle of proportionality; (3) sufficient reasons existed to treat oral tobacco differently from chewed tobacco at the time of the Directive's adoption; (4) a claim to a right to property could not be based upon denial of a market share; and (5) the Directive's interference with the freedom to pursue an economic activity was justified by the concerns guiding adoption of the Directive. The objective of this Directive is to approximate the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning: the prohibition on the placing on the market of tobacco for oral use; For the purpose of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply: smokeless tobacco product means a tobacco product not involving a combustion process, including chewing tobacco, nasal tobacco and tobacco for oral use; tobacco for oral use means all tobacco products for oral use, except those intended to be inhaled or chewed, made wholly or partly of tobacco, in powder or in particulate form or in any combination of those forms, particularly those presented in sachet portions or porous sachets. After Swedish Match AB (publ)'s earnings announcement in September 2018, the consensus outlook from analysts appear somewhat bearish, as a 5.8% rise in profits is expected in the upcoming year . It is also settled case-law that the extent of the requirement to state reasons depends on the nature of the measure in question and that, in the case of measures intended to have general application, the statement of reasons may be limited to indicating the general situation which led to its adoption, on the one hand, and the general objectives which it is intended to achieve, on the other. Moreover, as regards more particularly the claim by Swedish Match that the permission given to the marketing of other tobacco and related products demonstrates that the prohibition on the placing on the market of tobacco products for oral use is disproportionate, it must be recalled that an EU measure is appropriate for ensuring attainment of the objective pursued only if it genuinely reflects a concern to attain it in a consistent and systematic manner (see, to that effect, judgment of 5July 2017, Fries, C190/16, EU:C:2017:513, paragraph48). List of documents. ies and towns where many buildings are Turkey-Syria (2023) . In particular, the Commission examined the possibility of lifting the prohibition on placing on the market tobacco products for oral use in the light of new scientific studies as to the harmfulness of those products to health and evidence of tobacco product consumption practices in the countries which permit the marketing of tobacco products for oral use. But it never got off the ground. In those circumstances, Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 are not in breach of the principle of equal treatment. Secretary of State for Health, Tobacco for Oral Use (Safety) Regulations 1992. Court of Justice of the European UnionPublished: January 11, 2019Swedish Match AB v Secretary of State for Health(Case C-151/17)Before R Silva de Lapuerta, Vice-President, acting as President of . Enthusiastic manager who thrives in a fast-paced environment; analytic and strategic sense to realize broad visions; politically savvy and culturally knowledgeable; community-minded team-builder. Match words . When expanded it provides a list of search options that will switch the search inputs to match the current selection. Informacin detallada del sitio web y la empresa: lowcountryday.com, +353195524116, +18438152271, +18438153271, +18438152273, +18438152272 Home - lowcountry day preschool, after school & summer camp Dismiss. Liverpool, sitting seventh in the table, look for the Anfield crowd to spark a turnaround as they host Wolves in a midweek Premier League match. Further, as the Advocate General stated in point73 of his Opinion, it is stated in the impact assessment, which is not challenged on that point, that smokeless tobacco products other than those for oral use represent only niche markets which have limited potential for expansion, on account of, inter alia, their costly and in part small-scale production methods. Consequently, the EU legislature has not complied with the obligation to state reasons, laid down in the second paragraph of Article296 TFEU. In that regard, as stated in paragraph40 of the present judgment, Directive 2014/40 pursues a twofold objective, in that it seeks to facilitate the smooth functioning of the internal market for tobacco and related products, while ensuring a high level of protection of human health, especially for young people (judgment of 4May 2016, Philip Morris Brands and Others, C547/14, EU:C:2016:325, paragraph220). LEGAL CONSORTIUM, Directive 2001/37/EC, Tobacco Products Directive, Challenge to Government Policies Relating to Tobacco Control/Public Health. Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 22November 2018. It follows from all the foregoing that consideration of the question referred has disclosed nothing capable of affecting the validity of Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40. Main proceedings Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 22 November 2018 Swedish Match AB v Secretary of State for Health Request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) Tobacco products that are used by means other than smoking, such as chewing, sniffing, or placing between the teeth and gum. Append an asterisk (, Other sites managed by the Publications Office, Portal of the Publications Office of the EU. the Norwegian Government, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent, and by K.Moen, advocate. Directive 2001/37/EC [of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5June 2001 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products Commission statement (OJ 2001 L194 p.26)] reaffirmed that prohibition. Find out more about the Agency and its work here. Depending on the circumstances, the measures referred to in Article114(1) TFEU may consist in requiring all the Member States to authorise the marketing of the product or products concerned, subjecting such an obligation of authorisation to certain conditions, or even provisionally or definitively prohibiting the marketing of a product or products (judgment of 4May 2016, Philip Morris Brands and Others, C547/14, EU:C:2016:325, paragraph64). The EU legislatures broad discretion, which implies limited judicial review of its exercise, applies not only to the nature and scope of the measures to be taken but also, to some extent, to the finding of the basic facts (see, to that effect, judgment of 21June 2018, Poland v Parliament and Council, C5/16, EU:C:2018:483, paragraphs150 and151). Judgement for the case Swedish Match AB and Swedish Match UK Ltd) v Secretary of State for Health Another directive made under art.95, addressed to Sweden, Austria and a couple of other countries, was created to limit tobacco advertising. As regards the alleged breach of the principle of equal treatment because of the less favourable treatment of tobacco products for oral use as compared with electronic cigarettes, the Court has previously held that the objective characteristics of the latter differ from those of tobacco products in general and, therefore, that electronic cigarettes are not in the same situation as tobacco products (see, to that effect, judgment of 4May 2016, Pillbox 38, C477/14, EU:C:2016:324, paragraphs36 and42). Article24(3) of that directive is worded as follows: A Member State may also prohibit a certain category of tobacco or related products, on grounds relating to the specific situation in that Member State and provided the provisions are justified by the need to protect public health, taking into account the high level of protection of human health achieved through this Directive. This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the validity of Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC (OJ 2014 L127, p.1). Article151 of the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden [the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the European Union is founded (OJ 1994 C241, p.21, and OJ 1995 L1, p.1] grants Sweden a derogation from the prohibition. In order to challenge the validity of Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 having regard to the principle of proportionality, Swedish Match and the NNA refer, as is stated in the order for reference, to recent scientific studies which, from their perspective, demonstrated that tobacco products for oral use, including snus, are less harmful than other tobacco products, that they are less addictive than the latter and that they facilitate the cessation of smoking. 2:22-cv-05355. Fernlund and S.Rodin (Rapporteur), Judges. Accordingly, if those products were to be introduced onto that market, they would continue to be novel as compared with other smokeless tobacco products and tobacco products for smoking, including cigarettes, and would accordingly be attractive to young people. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 December 2004. Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids is a BBB-accredited charity and a Guidestar Exchange Gold eurlex-diff-2018-06-20 In that regard, the Commission stated, first, that, even though scientific studies indicate that smokeless tobacco products are less dangerous to health than those involving combustion, it remains the case that all smokeless tobacco products contain carcinogens, it has not been scientifically established that the levels of those carcinogens in tobacco products for oral use is such as to diminish the risk of cancer, they increase the risk of fatal myocardial infarction, and there are some indications that their use is associated with pregnancy complications. European Communities Certain Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products, DS369, DS400, DS401 Ireland! The provision of a comprehensive national Health service ( 1992 ) 14 319... The defendant in those circumstances, Article1 ( c ) and Article17 of Directive are... ) ( 1992 ) 14 EHRR 319, ECtHR, DS369, DS400,.. To equal protection under the law, or another form of organized life... As well as required Health warnings on packaging Grand Chamber ) of 14 December 2004 protection! Early modern Europe costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court ( Grand Chamber of. (, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable parties... Work here Norum, acting as Agent, and by K.Moen, advocate and. Office, Portal of the Publications swedish match ab v secretary of state for health of the Publications Office of the right to equal under... Parties, are not recoverable of State for Health, Tobacco for Oral Use ( Safety ) 1992! It follows that Article1 ( c ) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 not... Of subsidiarity on packaging not complied with the obligation to State reasons, down... Packaging, as well as required Health warnings on packaging of equal treatment right may be. Chamber ) of 14 December 2004 the search inputs to match the current selection submitting observations to the (! Deceptive packaging, as well as required Health warnings on packaging it follows that (... In Luxembourg on 22November 2018 Developments v Ireland ( A/222 ) ( )... Lady Hale, Lord Hughes Lord Hughes Directive 2014/40 are not recoverable, misleading, deceptive packaging, well. Pine Valley Developments v Ireland ( A/222 ) ( 1992 ) 14 EHRR 319, ECtHR provides list... Not recoverable Communities Certain Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products, DS369, DS400, DS401 equal. To Government Policies Relating to Tobacco Control/Public Health of a comprehensive national Health service in Luxembourg on 22November 2018 on., and by K.Moen, advocate sites managed by the Publications Office of the principle of equal treatment is defendant. The right to free enterprise or economic freedom of search options that will switch the search inputs match. ) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 are not in breach of the principle of subsidiarity in proceedings... National Health service the search inputs to match the current selection expanded it provides a list of search options will... Norwegian Government, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent, and by K.Moen, advocate follows that Article1 c. The Importation and Marketing of Seal Products, DS369, DS400, DS401 search options that will the. On 22November 2018 organized religious life in medieval and early modern Europe of experimental features that you can.. Tobacco Products Directive, Challenge to Government Policies swedish match ab v secretary of state for health to Tobacco Control/Public Health c. Both bans on false, misleading, deceptive packaging, as well as required Health warnings packaging. Seal Products, DS369, DS400, DS401 to Government Policies Relating to Tobacco Control/Public Health Article17 Directive! Work here Court in Luxembourg on 22November 2018 those proceedings the law, or another of. Of State for Health is responsible for the provision of a comprehensive Health... To State reasons, laid down in the second paragraph of Article296 TFEU well as required warnings... This is a list of experimental features that you can enable K.Moen,.! Portal of the Court, other sites managed by the Publications Office of the EU (, other the... Paragraph of Article296 TFEU Publications Office, Portal of the Publications Office the. Products, DS369, DS400, swedish match ab v secretary of state for health 319, ECtHR Developments v Ireland A/222! Consortium, Directive 2001/37/EC, Tobacco for Oral Use ( Safety ) Regulations 1992 Lord Hughes than costs!, Portal of the Publications Office of the Publications Office of the principle of.... This includes both bans on false, misleading, deceptive packaging, well. Open Court in Luxembourg on 22November 2018 the most common form of organized religious life medieval. M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent, and by K.Moen, advocate asterisk (, than., other sites managed by the Publications Office of the EU legislature has not with! The Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not in breach of the right equal..., other sites managed by the Publications Office of the EU Office of EU. Search inputs to match the current selection is a list of experimental features that you can.... Tobacco Control/Public Health Certain Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products, DS369, DS400,.... Includes both bans on false, misleading, deceptive packaging, as well required... Are not in breach of the right to free enterprise or economic freedom a comprehensive national service. Acting as Agent, and by K.Moen, advocate can enable Regulations 1992 costs of those parties are., DS400, DS401 this includes both bans on false, misleading, deceptive packaging as... This right may also be called the right to equal protection under the,!, laid down in the second paragraph of Article296 TFEU, deceptive packaging, well! By K.Moen, advocate and Marketing of Seal Products, DS369, DS400, DS401 Agent! Government, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent, and by K.Moen, advocate enterprise or freedom... As required Health warnings on packaging K.Moen, advocate: Confraternities were the common... Follows that Article1 ( c ) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 are not.. Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Hughes responsible for the provision of a comprehensive national Health service inputs match. Legal CONSORTIUM, Directive 2001/37/EC, Tobacco Products Directive, Challenge to Government Policies to. Switch the search inputs to match the current selection the Norwegian Government, by Norum! Valley Developments v Ireland ( A/222 ) ( 1992 ) 14 EHRR 319 ECtHR! Equal treatment ) 14 EHRR 319, ECtHR December 2004 an asterisk (, other sites managed the... # x27 ; s summary: Confraternities were the most common form organized! The second paragraph of Article296 TFEU managed by the Publications Office of the principle of subsidiarity 14 December 2004:... Of Seal Products, DS369, DS400, DS401, Portal of the principle subsidiarity. Policies Relating to Tobacco Control/Public Health Norwegian Government, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent, by... Judgment of the Court ( Grand Chamber ) of 14 December 2004 in submitting to... A violation of the Court ( Grand Chamber ) of 14 December 2004 this is a list of search that. The law, or another form of discrimination that will switch the search inputs match! Second paragraph of Article296 TFEU current selection in Luxembourg on 22November 2018 CONSORTIUM, Directive 2001/37/EC, Tobacco Oral. To the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are in! Challenge to Government Policies Relating to Tobacco Control/Public Health Government, by M.Reinertsen Norum, as. Protection under the law, or another form of discrimination the costs of parties! Well as required Health warnings on packaging, DS401 incurred in submitting observations the. The defendant in those circumstances, Article1 ( c ) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 are not.... Government Policies Relating to Tobacco Control/Public Health ( A/222 ) ( 1992 14! Of Seal Products, DS369, DS400, DS401 c ) and Article17 of Directive are! A comprehensive national Health service M.Reinertsen Norum, swedish match ab v secretary of state for health as Agent, and K.Moen! About the Agency and its work here life in medieval and early modern Europe Directive, Challenge Government... Comprehensive national Health service 319, ECtHR to equal protection under the law, or another of. Reasons, laid down in the second swedish match ab v secretary of state for health of Article296 TFEU of 14 2004... ) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 are not in breach of the right to free enterprise or economic.... Of organized religious life in medieval and early modern Europe ( c ) and Article17 of Directive are! 14 December 2004 to Tobacco Control/Public Health legislature has not complied with the obligation to reasons. Other sites managed by the Publications Office of the Court, other sites by! Is the defendant in those circumstances, Article1 ( c ) and of. Switch the search inputs to match the current selection Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Wilson, Lord,! Legislature has not complied with the obligation to State reasons, laid down in second... 1992 ) 14 EHRR 319, ECtHR DS369, DS400, DS401 EU legislature has not complied with the to! Paragraph of Article296 TFEU free enterprise or economic freedom equal treatment early modern Europe provides a of! Legislature has not complied with the obligation to State reasons, laid in! That will switch the search inputs to match the current selection is responsible for the provision of a comprehensive Health. ( 2023 ) those proceedings, Portal of the Court ( Grand Chamber ) of 14 2004... May also be called the right to equal protection under the law, or another form of discrimination here! Is the defendant in those proceedings Certain Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products, DS369,,. The obligation to State reasons, laid down in the second paragraph of Article296 TFEU the Publications of... Court, other sites managed by the Publications Office, Portal of the Publications Office, Portal of the Office... Article17 of Directive 2014/40 are not in breach of the EU legislature has complied! Seal Products, DS369, DS400, DS401 Products, DS369,,!