login
login
Image header Agence Europe
Europe Daily Bulletin No. 12556
Contents Publication in full By article 22 / 34
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EU / Agriculture

Slovenia fails to get annulment of regulation allowing designation Teran to be used on Croatian wines

On Wednesday 9 September, the General Court of the EU dismissed Slovenia's application for annulment of delegated regulation 2017/1353, which allows the designation Teran to be used, under strict conditions, to refer to a wine grape variety on the label of wines produced in Croatia (judgment T-626/17).

The European Commission attempted, unsuccessfully, to find a negotiated solution between Croatia and Slovenia (see EUROPE 11832/5).

Finally, the Commission used its powers to adopt a labelling derogation in order to enable the PDOs and existing labelling practices to co-exist peacefully once a PDO is registered.

Regarding the argument that the Commission failed to have regard to the principles of legal certainty, the respect for acquired rights and the protection of legitimate expectations by giving retroactive effect to the contested regulation, the General Court found that the purpose of the regulation was to protect legal labelling practices existing in Croatia on 30 June 2013 and to resolve the conflict between those practices and the protection of the Slovenian PDO Teran. Therefore, it pursued an objective in the public interest, which made it necessary for it to be given retroactive effect.

Secondly, the General Court verified whether the Commission had led Slovenian wine producers to entertain well-founded expectations that no derogation with retroactive effect would be granted to Croatia concerning the use of the name Teran on the labels of wines produced on its territory.

After examining the facts in the case, the General Court held that it could not be found that the Commission had given precise, unconditional and consistent assurances. It noted that it was necessary for the contested regulation to be given retroactive effect, having regard to the circumstances of the case at hand.

According to the General Court, Slovenia had not established that the extent and details of the retroactive effect of the contested regulation had infringed the legitimate expectations of Slovenian wine producers. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)

Contents

EXTERNAL ACTION
EU RESPONSE TO COVID-19
INSTITUTIONAL
SECTORAL POLICIES
ECONOMY - FINANCE
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EU
NEWS BRIEFS
CORRIGENDUM