Notification and registration – no confirmation of consent by notice, but subsequent conditions possible

The decision of the Frankfurt Administrative Court (8 K 2233/08 and 8 K 2233/08F) was based on the following facts: More than two years after the legal fiction had come into effect (2006), the licensing authority had issued a decision (2008) in the context of a registration procedure for further S 2 work, confirming approval for further genetic engineering work and simultaneously attaching a condition to this decision: the workplaces were to be sampled for the presence of GMOs every six months, and the results and detection methods were to be documented by the project manager. The operator countered this with a lawsuit. The Administrative Court doubted that there was a legal basis for a confirmatory decision (see AGCT-Gentechnik.report 3/2013 of March 31, 2013 ). At the same time, it addressed the question of whether there was scope for a subsequent condition in the case of a notification or registration. This is questionable because, in the case of a fictitious effect, the facility itself complies with the legal requirements, leaving no room for further requirements to ensure the legal operation of the facility. Nevertheless, the Administrative Court generally recognized the possibility of subsequent requirements in these cases, but overturned the specific requirement—general sampling of workplaces—after obtaining an expert opinion from the Central Commission for Biological Safety.

This publication can also be found on the website of the law firm Dr. Kauch .