Main Conference Day 1Tuesday, 6 October 2026

Set a clear, future-proof and science-based framework for biocontrol can help unlock Europe’s innovation potential.

Accelerate the development and uptake of safe and effective solutions, and expand the toolbox available to farmers.

Reduce unnecessary regulatory hurdles while preserving the EU’s high level of safety standards for health and the environment.

Support more sustainable and resilient farming systems, by strengthening Integrated Pest Management, organic and low-input production, climate adaptation, and farmers’ ability to respond to growing pest pressure, resistance challenges and the continued loss of conventional active substances.

Unlimited approvals end the renewal bottleneck but raise implementation questions

Biocontrol differentiation falls short of transformation

Competitiveness prioritised over precaution—tensions unresolved

What's changed under Regulation (EU) 2026/1123: New mandatory labelling elements, enhanced safety communication requirements, and key differences from the repealed Regulation (EU) No 547/2011.

Safe application as the regulatory priority: How the amended regulation strengthens user protection through clearer hazard communication, application instructions, and environmental safeguards.

Implementation timeline and transitional provisions: Compliance deadlines for new products versus existing market authorisations, grace periods for label updates, and coordination with Member State enforcement authorities.

Synergists framework: Bringing safeners and synergists under formal approval requirements.

Extending regulatory reach to substances previously considered formulation aids.

The long-term reality of product portfolios needing to adapt to expanded regulatory scope.

Data requirements in IUCLID format; safeners and synergists will face scrutiny comparable to active substances themselves.

Dual nature dilemma: The Omnibus presents simultaneously as a deregulation threat and innovation opportunity depending on whether environmental protection or competitiveness takes priority.

Stopping re-registration requirements for synthetic pesticides abandons the periodic safety review principle that has underpinned precautionary regulation.

Ending contradictory conclusions: The OSOA framework and Common Data Platform promise to resolve divergent risk assessments when ECHA and EFSA evaluate the same active substance across biocidal and plant protection regulations.

Implementation timeline reality: The roadmap extends through 2029, meaning benefits remain years away whilst current assessment bottlenecks and duplicated data requirements persist today.

Strategic dossier preparation: Understanding which data will be shared across regulations versus remaining regulation-specific is critical for companies navigating both BPR and PPP frameworks.

Recent landmark cases at EU level: Annulment proceedings, judicial review of ECHA decisions, and General Court rulings affecting substance authorisation and restriction processes

National-level disputes: Member State administrative court challenges, divergent enforcement interpretations, and cross-border compliance implications

Regulatory authority perspective: How litigation influences agency decision-making, guidance development, and stakeholder engagement strategies

Practical risk mitigation: Early warning signs of potential disputes, documentation best practices, and when to engage legal counsel

Emerging litigation trends: Classification disputes, data protection challenges, and procedural fairness questions likely to shape future case law