logo
Call us: +44 (0)1865 244727

  • Home
  • Scope
  • News
  • Products
    • RADAR
    • CALL-OFF PROJECTS
  • Clients
  • Contact
  • How we work
    • Independent
      • Common law orthodoxies
      • Sensationalism
      • Expert witness
      • Regulation and Politics
      • Tied services
    • Up-to-date
      • Timely
      • Insurance Scenarios
      • Probabilistic Methods
    • Expert
      • Personal Injury
      • Trends
    • Innovative
  • Database
    • Member’s login
    • Member’s Settings
    • Register
    • RADAR Database
  • Recent projects
    • EMFs
    • STRESS AT WORK
    • WHIPLASH
    • WELDING RODS: MANGANESE EXPOSURE
    • ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE
    • Other Projects



2001. GMO series. Regulation.

May 25, 2012
by Andrew@Reliabilityoxford.co.uk
0 Comment
Regulation inevitably affects liability exposure, not least because it should lead to reduced risks but also because the required standard is made more explicit and breach of duty easier to define.

Evidence from:

Proposed revisions to EU Directive 90/220 on deliberate releases of GMOs into the environment.

Points of contention: the lack of provision for environmental liability, export from the EU to non-EU countries is less strict than import, the continued use of antibiotic resistance marker genes.

The Radar report is available to subscribers:

SK 1#2 10

 

Evidence from:

Speech by David Byrne, European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection, 10 February 2001

Mr. Byrne discussed the EU approach to engendering public acceptance of GM technology. Proceeding on the assumption that “trust can only come through transparency”, the EU approach would be to introduce “strong” regulation aimed at “giving consumers confidence” and to “promote choice”.

Potential new legislation mentioned included traceability and labeling for “live” GMOs and for food (animal and human) derived from GMOs. No mention was made of the Environmental Liability White Paper.

However, the EU is considering abolishing the DNA/protein detectability criterion for labeling, citing increased consumer choice. Without defined standards for detectability, is hard to see how the public is likely to trust such a scheme.

 

Evidence from:

The Advisory Committee on Releases into the Environment (ACRE)

The Governmental advisory body on GM releases to the environment is expected to issue a number of papers in the near future:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

*
*

captcha *

Search Documents


Categories

  • Causation
    • de minimis
    • material contribution
  • Date of knowledge
  • Diagnosis
  • Duty of Care
  • Exposure estimation data
  • Mitigation
  • Motor related injury
  • News
  • Uncategorized

Archives

  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • November 2020
  • January 2020
  • November 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • April 2018
  • November 2017
  • July 2017
  • April 2017
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • November 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • July 2014
  • April 2014
  • February 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012

© Re: Liability (Oxford) Ltd. 2012. All rights reserved.
Website Design by The Big Picture