On 9 July 2020, Advocate General Bobek delivered his opinion on the status of edible insects (e.g., mealworms, locusts, and crickets) under the EU novel foods rules.  While insects fall under the scope of the new EU Novel Food Regulation 2015/2283, the opinion recommends the Court of Justice to deny novel food status to such ingredients under the old legal regime of now repealed Regulation 258/97. 

The AG Opinion concerns a preliminary reference from the French Council of State.  Entoma SAS argued that whole insects for human consumption did not fall under the scope of Regulation 258/97 and were thus not subject to a safety assessment before their placing on the market.  Both France and Italy held that whole insects were covered by Regulation 258/97 and relied on the current scope of Regulation 2015/2283 to demonstrate this.  AG Bobek disagreed with both governments.

According to the Advocate General, whole insects for human consumption cannot be considered as novel foods under Regulation 258/97 as they do not fulfill the substantive condition of “food ingredients isolated from animals” in Article 1(2).  AG Bobek interpreted the definition as effectively requiring animal-based foods to go through a process of extraction from the animal before they can fall under the scope.  On this point, he stated that “only specific parts or elements of animals used as an ingredient could be included.”  Such a requirement substantially limits the scope of Regulation 258/97 for animal-based foods.  The AG therefore concluded that whole insects intended to be consumed as such cannot qualify as novel food as they cannot be considered as isolates, nor as ingredients.

In contrast, AG Bobek pointed out that the new rules for novel foods provided by Regulation 2015/2283 now clearly includes whole insects in its scope.  Under Article 3(2)(a)(v) of Regulation 2015/2238, “food consisting of, isolated from or produced from animals or their parts” can qualify as novel.  The AG considered that this definition “is very clearly an amendment, considerably expanding the scope of that definition.”  As whole insects for human consumption are clearly “food consisting of”, or “food produced from” animals, they now qualify as novel foods under Regulation 2015/2238.  This view is also confirmed by recital 8 of Regulation 2015/2238, which explicitly states that “the categories of food which constitute novel foods […] should cover whole insects and their parts.”

Since the scope of the EU novel foods framework has been clarified in Regulation 2015/2238, several novel foods applications concerning edible insects have been submitted to the Commission for a safety assessment.  The Commission’s website lists the submitted summaries of applications and includes applications concerning insects, such as mealworms, crickets, locusts, and grasshoppers (see here).

The AG opinion is non-binding.  It will now be for the Court of Justice to assess the case.

The opinion is available here.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Bart Van Vooren Bart Van Vooren

Bart Van Vooren, partner leads a dynamic practice at the intersection of EU regulatory law, global health, and biodiversity law. In these fields, he advises innovative pharmaceutical, food, cosmetic and technology companies on complex EU and global regulatory, compliance and policy assignments.

Bart…

Bart Van Vooren, partner leads a dynamic practice at the intersection of EU regulatory law, global health, and biodiversity law. In these fields, he advises innovative pharmaceutical, food, cosmetic and technology companies on complex EU and global regulatory, compliance and policy assignments.

Bart holds a Ph.D. in EU and International Law and was a professor of EU law until 2013. During that time, he wrote the first-ever handbook with Cambridge University Press on “EU External Relations Law” (2014). He then transitioned to private practice, and frequently acted for the Belgian government before the EU Court of Justice (e.g. C-16/16P Belgium vs Commission). Bart joined Covington in 2016, leading some of our most consequential EU litigation proceedings (e.g. C-311/18 “Schrems II”) over the years.  Having handled nearly 50 cases before the EU Court, he’s uniquely qualified to support our corporate clients in our most high-stakes disputes. Recent examples include T-189/21 Aloe Vera of Europe v Commission (which we won, so the Commission decided to appeal); as well as T-201/21 Covington & Burling and Van Vooren v Commission (which we also won, and hence is also on appeal).

As a pioneer in biodiversity law, over the past 15 years Bart has built a unique, global practice on Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) laws under the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Nagoya Protocol, the Plant Treaty, the High Seas Treaty and the WHO Pandemic Agreement. ABS compliance is critical when sourcing biological materials for life sciences R&D and I work with many of the world’s innovative life sciences companies on the whole range of e.g. transactional, contractual, compliance, IP, (EU) regulatory and litigation work relating to ABS. As biodiversity has increasingly become identified as a major commercial and financial risk to companies, so has the practice expanded to e.g. biodiversity credit markets, biodiversity insurance, biodiversity claims and advertising, and so on. Since April 2025, Bart has been appointed as the industry representative to the Steering Committee of the UN Biodiversity Fund that seeks funding from the private sector for biodiversity conservation and restoration.

Bart also pioneered our global health practice. He has advised pharmaceutical clients on seasonal and pandemic influenza since 2016. Since then, this practice area expanded to cover all matters relating to infectious diseases, and as of 2020, emergency preparedness and response (eg. WHO prequalification, International Coordination Group negotiations, Emergency Use Listing, International Health Regulations Rev 2024). He has been the pharmaceutical industry’s lead lawyer advising on the WHO Pandemic Treaty negotiations, adopted on 14 May 2025. Currently, he continues to advise on the work of the Intergovernmental Working Group (“IGWG”) teasing out the technical details of the “Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System” intended to create legally binding obligations on companies to commit vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics in case of a new global health emergency.

In Chambers rankings, clients have kindly described Bart as “very knowledgeable, action-focused and service-focused lawyer”, adding that he “really tries to find a way of working through challenges”, am “customer-oriented” and provide “sound advice and reasonable options for our business with pros and cons.”

Finally, Bart has an active pro bono practice assisting NGOs defending the human rights of persons with a disability through strategic litigation before the EU Court.

Read more about Bart Van VoorenEmail
Show more Show less