# C_2013171EN.01001401.xml

| 15.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/14

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bayerisches Verwaltungsgericht München (Germany) lodged on 18 March 2013 — Herbaria Kräuterparadies GmbH v Freistaat Bayern

(Case C-137/13)

2013/C 171/27

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bayerisches Verwaltungsgericht München

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Herbaria Kräuterparadies GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: Freistaat Bayern

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 27(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the use of the substances referred to is legally required only when a provision of European Union law or a provision of national law compatible with European Union law directly requires, in respect of the foodstuff in which the substances referred to are to be incorporated, that the substances referred to be added or at least lays down a minimum content in respect of the substances referred to, which should be incorporated? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 27(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the use of the substances referred to is legally required only when a provision of European Union law or a provision of national law compatible with European Union law directly requires, in respect of the foodstuff in which the substances referred to are to be incorporated, that the substances referred to be added or at least lays down a minimum content in respect of the substances referred to, which should be incorporated?

1

| 2. | Should the first question be answered in the negative: Is Article 27(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 to be understood as meaning that the use of the substances referred to is also legally required where the marketing of a foodstuff as a food supplement or bearing health claims would, without the addition of at least one of the substances referred to, tend to mislead the consumer because the foodstuff cannot, in the absence of one of the substances referred to in sufficient strength, fulfil its stated purpose as a foodstuff or its stated purpose as expressed by the health claim? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Should the first question be answered in the negative: Is Article 27(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 to be understood as meaning that the use of the substances referred to is also legally required where the marketing of a foodstuff as a food supplement or bearing health claims would, without the addition of at least one of the substances referred to, tend to mislead the consumer because the foodstuff cannot, in the absence of one of the substances referred to in sufficient strength, fulfil its stated purpose as a foodstuff or its stated purpose as expressed by the health claim?

| 3. | Should the first question be answered in the negative: Is Article 27(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 to be understood as meaning that the use of the substances referred to is also legally required where a specific health claim may be used only for foodstuffs which contain a certain, so-called significant, amount of at least one of the substances referred to? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Should the first question be answered in the negative: Is Article 27(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 to be understood as meaning that the use of the substances referred to is also legally required where a specific health claim may be used only for foodstuffs which contain a certain, so-called significant, amount of at least one of the substances referred to?

---

(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 of 5 September 2008 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products with regard to organic production, labelling and control (OJ 2008 L 250, p. 1).

1

---