EU High Court Is ‘Indifferent To Modern Values’; Reactions To Cosmetic Ingredient Animal-Testing Decision
The Cosmetic Products Regulation’s “once groundbreaking” ban is now worthless, says PETA, which supported Symrise in two cases challenging animal testing required by the European Chemicals Agency for cosmetics-only ingredients under REACH. Cruelty Free Europe, the European Federation for Cosmetic Ingredients, and Unilever also intervened on Symrise’s behalf.
You may also be interested in...
Lack of validated, regulatory-accepted methods for evaluating complex chemical safety endpoints without animal testing is quickly becoming a problem for industries and stakeholders beyond the cosmetics sector. Momentum is building to drive alternatives development as European authorities set their sights on an animal-free chemicals assessment future.
The EU Court of Justice will consider whether the EU General Court erred in affirming ECHA decisions that require Symrise to conduct new animal testing to assess the reproductive and other health effects of UV filters homosalate and octisalate. In recent failed bids for interim relief, Symrise argued that the animal testing is likely to cause “irreparable damage” to its interests.
As of July 21, regulatory and legal authorities in the EU have clarified that cosmetic ingredients tested on animals to meet third-country requirements do not necessarily trigger the Cosmetic Regulation's animal-testing ban, and that animal testing on cosmetic ingredients may be needed under REACH for various specified reasons. A final important question may be left to the courts.