# CE2004084EN.01084802.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/848 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/848

---

(2004/C 84 E/0943)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0701/04

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject:   Use of the appellations ‘vintage’ and ‘tawny’ by third countries

Subject:

The EU Wine Management Committee decided on 10 February 2004 to authorise the use of specific traditional appellations of wines produced at Community level by third countries such as South Africa or Australia, whenever the wine produced met a certain series of restricted conditions in accordance to those obtaining in the Member States. This decision was taken against the votes of the producer countries like Portugal, and according to the Portuguese press, was adopted the Commission on 23 February.

The new rules are going to affect the appellations ‘tawny’, ‘ruby’, ‘vintage’, ‘late bottle’ for port wine, and the appellations ‘escuro’ (dark), ‘fino’ (fine), ‘frasqueira’ (rack) ‘reserva velha’ (aged reserve) and ‘solera’ which are linked with Madeira wine, over and above affecting other appellations such as ‘vinho generoso’ (regional wine) and ‘vinho doce natural’ (high quality full-bodied high alcohol content and rich in esters) and ‘vinho doce natural’ (naturally sweet wine), which covers not only port and Madeira wines, but Setúbal and Carcavelos muscat.

This proposal, which was presented in 2002, may facilitate WTO negotiations and intellectual property agreements, but it will provoke increased unfair competition with Community-produced wines, with all the socio-economic consequences arising therefrom; it will undermine appellations and brands consolidated over the years, and will cause confusion amongst consumers.

| 1. | Has the Commission made any assessment of the socio-economic impact of these measures on the producer countries? What does it believe the impact of this proposal will be for Portugal? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Has the Commission made any assessment of the socio-economic impact of these measures on the producer countries? What does it believe the impact of this proposal will be for Portugal?

| 2. | Does it not consider that it is essential to define Community appellations, within the sphere of intellectual property agreements and of trade agreements with third countries? Why is it therefore coming forward with a proposal rejected by the producer countries, which will jeopardise the quality and the added value of these appellations? How does it intend to control these imports? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does it not consider that it is essential to define Community appellations, within the sphere of intellectual property agreements and of trade agreements with third countries? Why is it therefore coming forward with a proposal rejected by the producer countries, which will jeopardise the quality and the added value of these appellations? How does it intend to control these imports?

| 3. | Have compensation mechanisms, at the very least, been provided for the producers affected? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Have compensation mechanisms, at the very least, been provided for the producers affected?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 April 2004)

(15 April 2004)

We adopted new rules on the description, designation and protection of certain wine sector products in order to avert the possibility of a World Trade Organisation (WTO) panel. This would have been a serious threat to European wine labelling policy.

Following notification of Regulation (EC) No 753/2002 (1) to the World Trade Organisation, several third countries sent their observations and expressed reservations to the WTO. Two consultations were held in Geneva. Exclusive protection of certain traditional terms (List B) was regarded by the third countries as a new intellectual property right of the Union covered by the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (additional to that for geographical indications). A WTO panel might well have jeopardised EU policy on protection of geographical indications and was to be avoided.

1

In the light of the third country observations we decided to make a number of changes to the Regulation. We adopted them following a vote in the Management Committee for Wine in accordance with the procedures set in Article 75 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 (2) and then notified them to the WTO.

2

Primarily the changes give third countries the possibility of using certain traditional terms subjject to compliance with the same rules as those for Member States. Account also had to be taken of the fact that several third countries do not have a centralised regulatory system for the wine sector. The European legislative system requirements were therefore amended and the concept of ‘regulation’ replaced by that of ‘applicable rules’. These rules include those issued by representative trade organisations and these organisations were themselves defined.

It is important to remenber that unlike Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 753/2002 Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 makes no reference to two types of traditional term but only to the possibility open to the Commission of adopting rules on traditional terms that accord with the provisions in force in the Member States.

The new requirements for third countries' use of Community traditional terms are the equivalent of the the requirements already in force for the traditional terms of List A of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 753/2002.

They include (see Article 1(10) of Regulation (EC) No 316/2004 (3) amending Article 37(l)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 753/2002) the following:

3

| — | the third country must present a substantiated request to the Commission and provide the justificatory data for recognition of the traditional term; |
| --- | --- |

—

the third country must present a substantiated request to the Commission and provide the justificatory data for recognition of the traditional term;

| — | the language of the traditional term must be the official language of the third country and the term in that language must have been used for at least 10 years; |
| --- | --- |

—

the language of the traditional term must be the official language of the third country and the term in that language must have been used for at least 10 years;

| — | if the language of the traditional term is not the official language, its use must be provided for in the country's legislation; in such cases the traditional term in that language must have been used continuously for at least 25 years; |
| --- | --- |

—

if the language of the traditional term is not the official language, its use must be provided for in the country's legislation; in such cases the traditional term in that language must have been used continuously for at least 25 years;

| — | other requirements such as that the term be specific and distinctive and that there is no risk of consumers being misled. |
| --- | --- |

—

other requirements such as that the term be specific and distinctive and that there is no risk of consumers being misled.

In the case of the Portuguese traditional terms the Honourable Member mentions a number of requirements must therefore be met if they are to be used in the Community by third countries. Thus for a term such as Ruby, Tawny, Vintage (whether or not followed by Late Bottle), Canteiro or Frasqueira to be used on a liqueur wine other than Port or Madeira in the first place either English or Portuguese as appropriate must be the official language of the third country and the term must have been used for at least 10 years, or English or Portuguese must be a second language recognised in the country's legislation and in that case the term must have been used for at least 25 years. Secondly, the term must be specific and distinctive and not such as to mislead the consumer when the wine is marketed in Europe. There must also be some tradition behind use of the term in the third country.

It should be noted that this category of traditional term (List B) was attacked by the third countries on the grounds that the Community had created a new industrial property right (additional to geographical indications) debarring them from using the terms in question for their wines on the Community market (e.g. Fino, Claret, Vintage, etc.) although some of these terms had long been in use elsewhere in the world.

The requirements for use of the traditional terms Reserva velha, Solera, Vinho regional, Vinho generoso and Vinho doce natural by third countries remain unchanged, since they were already included in List A to Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 753/2002.

---

(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 753/2002 of 29 April 2002 laying down certain rules for applying Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 as regards the description, designation, presentation and protection of certain wine sector products, OJ L 118, 4.5.2002.

1

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine, OJ L 179, 14.7.1999.

2

(3)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 316/2004 of 20 February 2004 amending Regulation (EC) No 753/2002 laying down certain rules for applying Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 as regards the description, designation, presentation and protection of certain wine sector products, OJ L 55, 24.2.2004.

3

---