According to a UK stakeholder’s group, the treatment of a CBD regulatory status request has led them to doubt whether the UK system for food approval is functioning as it should.
This dispute is part of a long-running CBD product approval process that has been largely ineffective for years.
Newest challenge
A recent appeal focuses on an official request filed to the FSA under Article 4 in the Novel Foods Framework by Hemp Hound (a consulting firm) and signed by industry stakeholders.
The Article 4 submission argues that certain whole-plant hemp foods — including full-spectrum and broad-spectrum extracts — should not automatically be treated as novel under UK law. In the framework food not widely consumed prior to May 1997 will be subjected the the novel foods approval process.
The challenge, if accepted by the UK regulators, could change the way they classify CBD-derived food and hemp products in the UK.
Handling concerns
Cefyn Jones from the consulting firm Hemp Hound questioned the FSA’s Article 4 handling, alleging that his submission was discussed in a meeting without his participation with the Cannabis Trade Association. This is despite FSA’s official position, which states that it doesn’t discuss files with third parties.
Jones explained that, “I’ve got the CTA report of the event on file, and a FOI request confirmed the fact there was a gathering,” he said.
Jones says that although the Freedom of Information Response shows the meeting occurred on Oct. 3, 20,25 at CTA request, no record of it is clear.
The same FOI response indicates that the FSA did not keep a record of the meeting, which they initially claimed didn’t happen. That is a grave governance failure,” said he.
The FSA replied to HempToday’s question about the handling of Article 4 submissions, specifically whether they shared information with third-parties or maintained confidentiality. “We are committed to maintaining confidentiality and will not provide application details without prior consent of the applicant.
Pipes clogged
The FSA has struggled to regulate the CBD industry since it first announced in 2019.
In early 2026 the FSA had 11,456 CBD product listed in its public register. Around 10,200 products were still in “waiting evidence” status, 900 had undergone safety assessments, 250 went through risk management and 106 have been approved or cleared. Four hundred and nine products were removed from the market or disqualified.
These figures highlight a feature that persists in the system. Most CBD products are still operating under a provisional status. The outcome is dependent on the internal FSA evaluation stages, which can be slow and opaque for the market.
History of Argument
Hemp Hound challenges the food safety system, saying that methods of production such as cold press, tincturing and extraction with ethanol have been documented for use prior to May 1997, the date used by the FDA in defining novel foods.
In 2019, EU regulators were faced with a similar argument when the European Commission updated its Novel Food Catalogue, effectively defining CBD and hemp extracts to be “novel foods” or new products. This triggered costly authorisation requirements.
European stakeholders led the European Industrial Hemp Association fought back. They claimed that hemp extracts have been used as food since 1997. In spite of this challenge, EU’s interpretation for 2019 was largely upheld, cementing CBD as a novelty food throughout the EU.
Hemp Hound, a UK-based company that challenges hemp oil products made using traditional methods and containing CBD, argues they aren’t new food but rather established foods. The filing states that “Hemp Oil which is CBD-rich and produced through cold pressing, has a long history of consumption.” It also asserts that past evidence of food, drinks, and herbal products all support this conclusion.
The Hemp Hound Article 4 Submission includes Allworld Products (Big Chief Hemp), Brown’s CBD (CBD Brother), Crop England, Happy Hemper (Jersey Hemp), Naturally Pure Labs, Orange County, Ortis Wellbeing and Project Forty8.