I n December 2014, nine French NGOs initiated legal pro- ceedings against an Article of the French Environmental Code, which implements the EU GMO Directive. They argued that plant varieties in rapeseed and sunflower result- ing from traditional or new forms of mutagenesis constitute ‘new hidden GMOs’ and as such need to be regulated as GMOs. The French Conseil d’Etat referred four preliminary ques- tions to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), essentially to ascertain whether organisms resulting from traditional and new forms of mutagenesis should be subject to the GMO legis- lation. In October 2017, the ECJ convened in a grand chamber hearing, and on 18 January 2018, Advocate General Bobek delivered his Opinion in the case. European Seed met with Geert Glas, a lawyer from Allen & Overy, who published a legal article on the Court Case in Bioscience Law Review last year. EUROPEAN SEED (ES): GEERT, YOU ANALYSED ALL THE LEGAL QUESTIONS AND ARGUMENTS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP IN THE CONTEXT OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE CASE, AND YOU ALSO PUBLISHED YOUR VIEW ON THE LEGAL QUESTIONS LAST YEAR. DID THE LINE OF ARGUMENTATION THAT ADVOCATE GENERAL BOBEK PROVIDED IN HIS OPINION SURPRISE YOU? GEERT GLAS (GG): It is first not surprising that the Advocate General sticks to a legal reasoning and does not discuss any more technical and scientific arguments. The reasoning consequently is set up from a legal angle and should also be seen in that light. Secondly, the legal reasoning on a lot of aspects that was followed by Advocate General Bobek in his Opinion reflects the same line of So, what did the Advocate General Bobek say exactly? A LEGAL ANALYSIS OF CASE NUMBER C-528/16 ON MUTAGENESIS IN PLANTS. BY: MARCEL BRUINS 48 I EUROPEAN SEED I EUROPEAN-SEED.COM Geert Glas, lawyer from Allen & Overy.