The General Court of the European Union’s decision to declare Cosmetics Europe inadmissible leaves the fundamental questions regarding the legality and fairness of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive’s (UWWTD) Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme unanswered. We stand by the validity of our arguments on the substance of this matter and the critical principles that drove this legal challenge.
In March 2025, Cosmetics Europe filed an application before the General Court due to significant flaws in the EPR scheme, which unfairly attributes extended producers’ responsibility for supporting the costs of upgrading urban wastewater treatment plants to only two sectors: cosmetics and pharmaceuticals. In our view, this fundamentally contravenes a basic tenet of the EU law, the ‘polluter pays’ principle.
We took that action in full knowledge that the rules on admissibility to the EU courts in cases of this kind are highly restrictive for private parties such as trade associations. However, the errors in the EPR scheme are so significant and potentially impactful for our industry that we considered that a legal challenge, even within this restrictive framework, was necessary.
We take note of the decision of the Court, which relates to the admissibility of the case only, and does not in any way address the questions at stake regarding the legality of the EPR scheme. These questions have also been raised in a separate case brought up the Polish government. The Polish case is not affected by this ruling.
Cosmetics Europe remains committed to advocating for a fair EPR system that truly follows the ‘polluter pays’ principle and is based on accurate scientific data.
For a detailed overview of our position on the UWWTD, including our analysis of the significant data flaws underpinning the EPR scheme, please visit: https://cosmeticseurope.eu/news-events/stop-the-clock-cosmetics-industry-urges-the-european-commission-to-correct-flawed-data-and-apply-polluter-pays-principle-in-the-uwwtd/