|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 PAN International Website |
|
|
Court Circular -
Pesticides News No. 22
Washington
State apple growers sued CBS television network for its presentation of the Alar
story, claiming damages for lost sales. The judge, dismissing the action, said
that to pursue the action “would so chill debate that the freedom of speech
would be at risk.”
Agrow
194, 22 October 1993.
The
UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) recently dealt with an unusual case
brought by one agrochemical manufacturer against another. Schering
Agriculture’s prochloraz cereal fungicide advertisement claimed exclusive
control over all strains of eyespot disease. Du Pont, which makes flusiazole
fungicides, complained. The ASA found for the complainant, and suggested
advertisers should qualify their claims.
Farmers
Weekly 22 October 1993.
Du
Pont apparently faces 400 claims over allegations of crop damage said to be
caused by Benlate in 1991. An Arkansas court awarded growers US$10.65
million in damages. However, similar cases in Texas and Florida have been won by
the company. Benlate apparently has beneficial effects on some non-target
organisms.
Agrow
192, 17 September 1993; and Agrow 194, 22 October 1993.
Italy—corruption on pesticide registration
The
European Single Market has thrown up problems in pesticide registration that
will not be dealt with by the Registration Directive. It appears that the
Italian Health Ministry has demanded payments for product registration,
according to testimony from Ciba-Geigy and Italy’s former Health Minister.
Agrow
193, 8 October 1993.
Dutch metam sodium ban withdrawn
The
Dutch Multi-Year Crop Protection Plan seeks dramatic reductions in the use of
soil sterilants. A ban on the active ingredient metam sodium, due to concerns
about operator health, has been held to be null and void, after the
producers—Elf Atochem Agri and UCB—and Dutch distributors went to court to
challenge the ban.
Agrow
189, 6 August 1993.
Unusual punishment for pesticide law violators
The
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has taken a number
of cases to court to enforce pesticide laws. One company was fined for offences
including contamination of property and failure to provide customers with proper
notification. The consent order of the court included a requirement that the
company agreed to follow “least toxic” pest management
recommendations, that are expected to reduce use by 20% or more. A number of
other similar orders have also been negotiated by the DEC.
NYCAP
News, Summer 1993.
The
case between Hoechst companies and defendants in the Philippines continues. The
defendants are being sued for allegedly saying endosulfan causes cancer. The
issue may turn on how animal data from carcinogenicity testing as set out in
public documents such as the relevant World Health Organisation Environmental
Health Criteria, are to be interpreted—and what extrapolation can be made to
humans.
Pers.
comm., November 1993.
[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No. 22, December 1993, page 17]