23. 1. 78 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 18/15 
Opinion on the draft Directive on consumer protection in the marking and display of 
the prices of foodstuffs 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the 
European Communities No C 167 of 14 July 1977, page 4. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 7 June 1977 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic 
and Social Committee in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 
152nd plenary session held in Brussels on 26 and 27 October 1977. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community, and in particular 
Article 198 thereof, 
Having regard to the request for an opinion made 
by the Council on 7 June 1977, 
Having regard to the decision taken by its chairman 
on 13 June 1977 instructing the Section for 
Protection of the Environment, Public Health and 
Consumer Affairs to draw up an opinion and a 
report on the matter, 
Having regard to the opinion issued by the Section 
for Protection of the Environment, Public Health 
and Consumer Affairs at its meeting on 11 October 
1977, 
Having regard to the report submitted by the 
rapporteur, Mr Bourel, 
Having regard to the discussions at its 152nd plenary 
session held on 26 and 27 October 1977 (meeting 
of 27 October), 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
with five votes against and four abstentions: 
The Committee approves the draft Directive, subject 
to the comments set out below. 
1. General comments 
1.1. Marking food with the selling price and the 
price per unit of measurement is one way of ensuring better protection for consumers, in that it will enable 
them to make comparisons of how much they are 
getting for their money when deciding whether and 
what to buy. 
1.2. The preliminary programme for a consumer 
protection and information policy, adopted by the 
Council of the European Communities on 14 April 
1975 and supported in full by the Economic and 
Social Committee stipulates that there should be 
drawn up 'common principles for stating the price 
and possibly the price per unit of weight or 
volume (1)'. 
1.3. In addition, the Committee notes that four 
Member States have already enacted certain legis­
lation or issued certain regulations on this matter 
and that others are proposing to do so. 
1.4. The Committee therefore approves the 
Commission's proposal that the Council make unit 
pricing for food obligatory throughout the Commu­
nity, which implements what was called for in the 
preliminary programme. 
1.5. The Committee calls upon the Commission 
to make preparations, as soon as possible, for 
extending the application of unit pricing to other 
everyday consumer products. 
1.6. Scope and manner of implementation 
1.6.1. The Committee considers that the Com­
mission's proposed measure will not be fully 
effective unless it enables the consumer rapidly to 
i1) OJ No C 92, 25. 4. 1975, p. 9 (point 35). 
No C 18/16 Official Journal of the European Communities 23.1. 78 
ascertain the unit price of his prospective purchase 
and is feasible for traders to apply in the ordinary 
course of things. In the final analysis, it is the trader 
who has to see that unit prices are displayed. 
1.6.2. Accordingly, the Committee approves the 
Commission's proposal that food be put into one of 
the following four categories for the purposes of the 
Directive: 
— food sold in bulk: to be marked with the unit 
price and no other information relating to price, 
— individually prepackaged food: not required to 
show unit price where included on lists 
communicated by the Member States, 
— food prepackaged in various quantities: always to 
be marked with the unit price, 
— food prepackaged in pre-established quantities: 
subject to a series of derogations. 
1.6.3. This classification seems capable of ensuring 
the necessary flexibility in the operation of the 
scheme. 
1.6.4. The Committee realizes that the scheme may 
initially involve certain practical difficulties, particu­
larly for small shopkeepers. 
1.6.5. Accordingly, the Committee hopes that the 
Member States will introduce the practical arrange­
ments provided for in Articles 4 and 5 with the 
necessary flexibility, in the light of the relevant 
experiences of countries which already have similar 
regulations. The experience of other countries could 
also be considered before deciding exactly when the 
Directive is to become operative. 
1.6.6. Trading structures differ from State to State. 
Accordingly, the Member States must be allowed to 
adapt the principles enshrined in the Directive in an 
appropriately judicious fashion. 
1.6.7. In some cases, moreover, care must be taken 
that implementation of the Directive does not turn 
out to be a retrograde step leading to deterioration 
of the standards set by current laws and regulations. 
1.7. Exemption of prepackaged products (Article 10) 
1.7.1. The Committee starts out with three general 
considerations. The two objectives of the Commission, namely consumer information and market trans­
parency, may be attained by taking complementary 
action in two areas, viz. standardization of product 
packaging and unit pricing. The Committee 
therefore considers that it is essential to prescribe 
that unit pricing should be mandatory for products 
prepackaged in variable quantities but that there is 
less justification for such a requirement where 
standardization has taken place, i.e. in principle, 
where products are prepackaged in accordance with 
a range laid down by the appropriate authorities. 
1.7.2. Moreover, the Committee observes that 
Member States which already have laws on these 
matters make the same kind of derogation. 
1.7.3. Nevertheless, it is obvious that, on pain of 
the Directive being made ineffectual, the exemptions 
made must be such as to allow the consumer readily 
to calculate how much he is getting for the unit price. 
1.7.4. The Committee considers that this will be 
the case only if the range is limited to a restricted 
number of values, and these values are multiples or 
sub-multiples of each other. Where necessary the 
Commission should amend its proposal accordingly. 
1.7.5. In this light, the Committee considers that 
the present draft Directive has very close links (i) 
with Council Directives 75/106/EEC and 76/211/EEC 
and (ii) above all with the proposal for a Council 
Directive on the approximation of the laws of the 
Member States relating to the ranges of nominal 
quantities permitted for certain prepackaged products, 
endorsed by the Committee at its plenary session of 
30 March 1977, and currently under discussion at the 
Council. 
1.7.6. It would have been considerably better to 
have known the Council's verdict on the 
abovementioned proposal, in order better to assess 
the implications of Article 10 of the present draft. 
Be that as it may, it is clear to the Committee that 
the existence of straightforward EEC ranges will 
make up for the proposed general exemption. 
1.7.7. Finally, the Committee draws the 
Commission's attention to the practical difficulties 
of applying the Directive to prepackaged products 
whose composition is very heterogeneous, dehydrated 
products intended to be reconstituted, packages of 
several products of very different kinds, etc. 
23.1.78 Official Journal of the European Communities No C18/17 
The Committee also considers there is no point in 
marking a unit price on foodstuffs which are exempt 
from having to bear a quantity indication, since in 
such cases it is impossible to make any comparison 
of quantity and price on the basis of the unit of 
measurement. 2.3.2. The Committee urges that the second 
sentence of Article 6 (1) be amended as follows: 
'... However, if the foodstuffs are usually 
prepackaged in quantities of 10 centilitres or less 
or 100 grams or less.' 
2. Specific comments 
2.1. Article 1 
2.1.1. The Committee asks that the proposed 
exception should also take in hospitals, canteens and 
the like. 
2.2. Article 4 
2.2.1. The Committee considers that this Article 
should stipulate that in general unit prices must be 
indicated in the utmost proximity to the product. 
2.3. Article 6 
2.3.1. The Committee considers that the term 
'liquid foodstuffs' should de defined, given the 
nature of certain national sales practices. 2.4. Article 8 
2.4.1. The end of the first sentence should be 
amended to read 'and shall display the unit price 
and/or the price of each item', since there cannot 
be a price per unit of measurement where items 
are sold separately and not sold by weight. The 
wording therefore seems to be self-contradicting. 
2.4.2. The proposed national lists in respect of 
foodstuffs sold separately (second sentence of 
Article 8) makes it possible to take into account 
national and regional practices. The Committee 
considers, however, that this procedure must not 
render current marketing practices inalterable. 
2.4.3. The Committee asks that the words 'by 
each national administration' in the second sentence 
be replaced by 'by each Member State'. 
Done at Brussels, 27 October 1977. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Basil de FERRANTI 
ANNEX 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
I 
The following amendments were rejected during the discussion: 
Paragraph 1.4 
Between the words 'for' and 'food' insert the word 'certain'. 
Reason 
The sentence as it stands is incorrect. The proposals do cover all foods. See in particular 
Articles 8 and 10 of the proposals. 
Voting 
For: 13, against: 60, abstentions: 6. 
No C 18/18 Official Journal of the European Communities 23.1.78 
Paragraph 1.6.4 
Substitute the words 'may initially' for the word 'will'. 
Add to this paragraph the following sentence: 
'The Section feels that these difficulties need further examination.' 
Reason 
It has been shown in some countries that the difficulties involved require an approach to the 
problem by careful choice of products rather than by an across-the-board approach. 
Voting 
For: 8, against: 68, abstentions: 6. 
Paragraphs 1.7.3 and 1.7.4 
Delete these paragraphs. 
Reason 
The Commission proposals are already too broad for them to be effected. The proposals in 
paragraphs 1.7.3 and 1.7.4 make it certain that Member States could not make practical 
efforts to help consumers. 
Voting 
For: 9, against: 63, abstentions: 3. 
Paragraph 1.7.7 
Delete this paragraph. 
Reason 
Even if it is not compulsory to indicate actual quantity, unit pricing will enable the consumer to 
compare the price per kg/1 of one product with another thus giving him a choice. This is the 
whole point of compulsory unit pricing. 
Voting 
For: 29, against: 36, abstentions: 8. 
The following passages from the Section's opinion were changed in line with amendments 
approved during the discussion: 
Paragraph 1.3 
In addition, the Section notes that four Member States have already enacted legislation or 
issued regulations on this matter and that others are proposing to do so. 
Paragraph 1.5 
The Section notes with interest that the Commission intends to extend unit pricing by stages 
to other everyday consumer products. 
Paragraph 1.6.4 
There was no need to change the English version.