1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |EU Regulatory Update: Deadlines Loom Under the EU REACH Legislation

EU Regulatory Update: Deadlines Loom Under the EU REACH Legislation

Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.13.13

The EU REACH legislation establishes an integrated system for the registration, evaluation, authorization and restriction of chemical substances. It requires all companies (including US-based companies) which manufacture in, or import chemical substances into, the EU in quantities of one ton or more per year to register them with the European Chemicals Agency in Helsinki, Finland.

Companies which have pre-registered "phase-in" substances (which include those listed in the European Inventory of Existing Commercial Chemical Substances) benefit from extended registration deadlines. A May 31, 2013 deadline for registration applies to substances produced or imported into the EU in volumes of between 100 and 1000 tons per year per manufacturer or importer.

The REACH legislation requires that the EU member states introduce penalties for non-compliance with its provisions. For example, in the UK, national enforcement provisions provide maximum penalties of an unlimited fine and/or up to two years' imprisonment following conviction on indictment for relevant infringements.

Downstream users of chemical substances should check to ensure that their suppliers have registered the relevant substances. Otherwise, they will be unable to use un-registered substances which will be banned after the deadline.

In order to obtain assistance for compliance with the EU REACH legislation or any other EU regulatory issues, please contact one of the professionals listed below.

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.04.25

District Court Grants Preliminary Injunction Against Seller of Gray Market Snack Food Products

On November 12, 2025, Judge King in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington granted in part Haldiram India Ltd.’s (“Plaintiff” or “Haldiram”) motion for a preliminary injunction against Punjab Trading, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Punjab Trading”), a seller alleged to be importing and distributing gray market snack food products not authorized for sale in the United States. The court found that Haldiram was likely to succeed on the merits of its trademark infringement claim because the products at issue, which were intended for sale in India, were materially different from the versions intended for sale in the U.S., and for this reason were not genuine products when sold in the U.S. Although the court narrowed certain overbroad provisions in the requested order, it ultimately enjoined Punjab Trading from importing, selling, or assisting others in selling the non-genuine Haldiram products in the U.S. market....