COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
C0M(93) 532 final 
Brussels, 10 November 1993 
Interprétative Commission communication 
concerning the use of languages in 
the marKeting of foodstuffs 
In the light of the ludament 
In the Peeters case 
.#-
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Interpretative Commission communication 
concerning the use of languages In 
the marketing of foodstuffs 
in the light of the judgment 
in the Peeters case 
A. Introduction 
1. This communication follows on from the communication on the free 
movement of foodstuffs within the Community.1 
2. Given the extent of the problem of language In the marketing of 
foodstuffs, the Commission feels it Is worth recalling the relevant 
principles deriving from Articles 30 et seq. of the EEC Treaty 
enshrining the principle of the free movement of goods, as 
interpreted by the Court of Justice, and from Article 14 of Council 
Directive 79/112/EEC of 18 December 1978 on the approximation of 
the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, 
presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for sale to the ultimate 
consumer.2 
3. For the purposes of this communication the Commission takes 
labelling to mean "any words, particulars, trade marks, brand name, 
pictorial matter or symbol relating to a foodstuff and placed on 
any packaging, document, notice, label, ring or collar accompanying 
or referring to such foodstuff" (Article 1(3)(a) of Directive 
79/112/EEC). 
4. In the wine sector, Article 3(5) of Regulation (EEC) No 2392/89 of 
24 July 1989 laying down general rules for the description and 
presentation of wines and grape musts3 lays down specific 
conditions for the use of languages In the labelling of those 
products. 
1 0J C 271, 24.10.1989, p. 3. 
2 This communication does not deal with Information for workers to 
ensure satisfactory conditions of hygiene and safety at work, since 
this Is covered in a specific Community act. 
3 0J L 232, 9.8.1989, p. 13. 
Rue de la Loi 200 - 6-1049 Brussels, Belgium - Office: 
Telephone: direct line (+32-2)29 exchange 29S.11.11 - Fax: 29 Telex: COWEU 0 21877 
- Telegraphic address: COMEUR Brussels 
A*\. 
B. fienaiaj problems and principles; assessment with regard „tp. 
Community law 
5. A great many national regulations require that certain particulars 
appearing on a foodstuff be drafted In, or at least translated 
Into, the official language(s) of the country of marketing. 
6. Requirements of this nature, even when applied Indiscriminately to 
domestic and Imported products alike, are liable to create barriers 
to Intra-Communlty trade since producers established in other 
Member States will be forced to affix "ad hoc" labelling for the 
country of marketing or to have the documents accompanying the 
product translated. 
7. This obligation, which is liable to generate additional costs for 
operators, Is nonetheless Justified where intended to protect the 
ultimate consumer by informing him of the nature, composition, 
conditions of use and guarantees of the product. 
8. A distinction should be drawn here between products which are 
Intended for sale to the consumer unaltered and those which are 
not. For the first category, national rules must be looked at in 
the light of Article 14 of Directive 79/112/EEC and Article 30 of 
the Treaty. For the second category, only Article 30 Is 
applI cab le. 
9. Food products are not Intended to be delivered in the unaltered 
state (a) if they still have to be processed, e.g. Intermediate 
products to be used by the food Industry, and (b) if they still 
need or are due to be adapted by the economic operator who receives 
them and will sell them. This is the case, for instance, when a 
product's packaging will be altered or is inappropriate for sale to 
the ultimate consumer (e.g. products delivered loose prior to sale 
to the ultimate consumer). The same applies where an economic 
operator wishes or is legally or contractually bound to alter, 
supplement or correct a product's labelling. These situations can 
arise when an economic operator markets food products from another 
Member State which are largely or completely unknown to consumers 
In the country of Importation and wishes to promote them through 
specific labelling better suited to the social and cultural 
peculiarities of the market concerned. 
10. These two scenarios are examined individually: foodstuffs which may 
not be sold unaltered to the ultimate consumer and to which 
Article 30 of the EEC Treaty applies are dealt with under C; 
products intended for sale unaltered to the ultimate consumer and 
which are covered by Article 14 of Directive 79/112/EEC, as 
Interpreted In the light of Article 30 of the Treaty, are looked at 
in section D. 
-2-
c. Article 30 of the EEC Treaty 
11. Concerning the first scenario, that Is to say transactions between 
producers, importers, wholesalers and retailers who carry out a 
final adaptation of the product or Its packaging, Including 
labelling, the following considerations must be taken into account. 
12. In the normal course of trade the abovementloned operators have few 
problems with language: either they speak the language of their 
economic partners or they can ask their suppliers, within the 
framework of their contractual relations, to supply all the 
Information they need to carry out their business properly and to 
use and process the product correctly. In this case it would be 
excessive, and hence run counter to Article 30 of the Treaty, to 
Impose the use of a particular language. 
13. The situation changes at the stage of sale to the ultimate consumer 
since foodstuffs are then marketed in their final state and 
Article 14 of Directive 79/112/EEC, as Interpreted in the light of 
Article 30 of the Treaty, is applicable. This difference In 
approach is understandable, given that consumers cannot be assumed 
to know the languages of the other Member States, unlike operators 
for whom such knowledge goes with their business or who are in a 
position to obtain the Information they need. Consumers' health 
must therefore be protected and consumers must be given information 
enabling them to make Informed choices. 
14. Articles 30 to 36 must also be applied in accordance with the 
principle of proportionality. With regard to this, the Court 
Indicated in Its judgment of 16 December 1992 (Case C-169/91 "Stoke 
& Norwich") that "appraising the proportionality of national rules 
which pursue a legitimate aim under Community law involves weighing 
the national Interest in attaining that aim against the Community 
interest In ensuring the free movement of goods" (paragraph 15 of 
the legal grounds of the Judgment). 
15. It follows, as the Court found In its Judgment of 18 June 1991 
(Case C-369/89 "Peeters"), that "the obligation exclusively to use 
the language of the linguistic region [of marketing] constitutes a 
measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction on 
Imports, prohibited by Article 30 of the Treaty." 
16. However, the principle of proportionality is applied without 
prejudice to the right of administrations to request, at a stage 
prior to the retail stage, a translation of the labelling where 
this is necessary for the proper accomplishment of their official 
tasks (e.g. Inspection at the wholesale stage). 
-3-
17. Nonetheless, a Member State would be overstepping the mark if it 
requested an authenticated translation or one legalized by a 
consular or administrative authority (see the Court's Judgment of 
17 June 1987 In Case 154/87 Commission v. Italy). Similarly, it 
would be disproportionate to Impose an excessively short deadline 
for such a translation except In special circumstances (e.g. 
rapidly perishable products). 
18. It Is clear that, with regard to particulars which are not 
compulsory under the rules in force and in respect of which a 
Member State imposes the use of a specific language, the principle 
of proportionality deriving from Article 30 likewise applies. 
D. Article 14 of Directive 79/112/EEC 
19. In adopting Article 14 of Directive 79/112/EEC, the Community 
legislature has not departed from the principles deriving from 
Article 30 of the Treaty on the free movement of goods: the second 
paragraph of that Article lays down that the particulars which must 
appear on the label must be given In a language easily understood 
by purchasers, unless other measures have been taken to ensure that 
the purchaser Is informed. The Article also stipulates that such 
particulars may be Indicated In various languages. 
20. This provision Is addressed to the Member States and allows them 
considerable scope for Interpreting the concept of language easily 
understood by the consumer with regard to the abovementloned 
compulsory Information. This scope Is nonetheless bound by the 
limits set by the Court of Justice in Its interpretation of 
Articles 30 et seq. of the EEC Treaty (see C above). Even If 
Directive 79/112/EEC was adopted with a view to eliminating 
barriers to the free movement of foodstuffs resulting from 
divergence between national laws on the labelling of such products 
(see the first recital of the Directive), it can only contribute 
towards the Implementation of Article 30 of the Treaty. 
21. We therefore need to specify the conditions In which, by virtue of 
Community law, a Member State Is entitled to impose the use of its 
official national language(s) and is bound to accept the use of 
other languages as substitutes, In the light, inter alia, of the 
problems highlighted by the transposition of Article 14 of 
Directive 79/112/EEC. 
-4-
22. Article 1(1) of the Directive Indicates the scope of Article 14: 
the labelling In question applies to all stages of marketing 
provided that the foodstuff is to be delivered unaltered to the 
ultimate consumer, including mass caterers, i.e. it is not to 
undergo any further processing or preparation. The scope of this 
rule has been discussed at B above. 
The lanauaqe(s) which may be used In the labelling of foodstuffs 
23. In accordance with Article 14 of Directive 79/112/EEC and in order 
to Inform and protect the consumer, labelling Information must be 
given in an easily understood language, which generally means the 
official language(s) of the country of marketing. 
24. The principle of proportionality, which underlies Article 14 of the 
Directive, Involves weighing the benefits of achieving the goal of 
national regulations, In this Instance consumer information, 
against the benefits of the free movement of goods. 
25. The purpose of the second paragraph of Article 14 is therefore to 
ban products whose labelling cannot be understood by the purchaser 
rather than to Impose the use of a particular language. 
26. This means that a Member State which imposed the exclusive use of 
its official language(s) would be Infringing both Article 14 of 
Directive 79/112/EEC, which expressly prohibits such restrictions, 
and Article 30 of the Treaty, for the reasons given at C. 
27. As indicated above, the Court of Justice confirmed this 
Interpretation In Its Judgment In the Peeters case when It said 
that a national rule Imposing the exclusive use of a specific 
language would constitute a measure of equivalent effect and would 
therefore Infringe Article 30 of the Treaty. 
28. In the operative part of the same Judgment the Court ruled that 
Article 30 of the EEC Treaty and Article 14 of Directive 79/112/EEC 
preclude a national law from requiring the exclusive use of a 
specific language for the labelling of foodstuffs without allowing 
for the possibility of using another language easily understood by 
purchasers or of ensuring that the purchaser is informed by other 
measures. 
29. It should be pointed out with regard to the purpose of Article 14 
that what matters is not so much the language itself as the content 
of the particulars given on the label. The fact that a language Is 
used for a particular does not mean that the use of that language 
is justified for all the other particulars. 
-5-
1. The concept of the easily understood, language 
30. The concept of "a language easily understood by purchasers" must 
obviously be left to the discretion of Member States. Similarly, 
an official language of the Member State of marketing will in 
principle be a language allowing consumers a good understanding of 
the label Iing. 
31. Moreover, a distinction can be drawn between a language which is 
easily understood and terms and expressions which are easily 
understood. Article 11(2) of Directive 79/112/EEC requires that 
labelling particulars be easy to understand. It cannot be ruled 
out that such terms and expressions, although expressed In a 
foreign language, might be easily understood. 
2. Obligatory use of the official language: conditions and limitations 
32. The purpose of Article 14 of Directive 79/112/EEC is to ensure that 
the particulars which have to appear on the labelling In accordance 
with Articles 3, 4 and 16 of the Directive are comprehensible. The 
provision places no obligation on the person responsible for 
labelling to translate foreign terms and expressions which are 
easily understood. Such terms and expressions must be 
understandable, however; there can be no question of operators 
shirking their responsibilities in respect of consumer information. 
33. On the other hand, it may be unnecessary to require importers 
automatically to translate every labelling particular in order to 
ensure comprehenslblIlty, in which case such a requirement would 
run counter to Article 30 of the Treaty and Article 14 of Directive 
79/112/EEC. Thus Member States can, In application of Article 14 
of Directive 79/112/EEC, require that their official language(s) be 
used for the particulars which must appear on the labelling of 
foodstuffs Intended for sale to the ultimate consumer In the 
unaltered state on condition that this requirement does not exclude 
the use of other languages or recourse to other measures to Inform 
the purchaser. 
3. Criteria for the use of easily understood terms and expressions not 
belonging to the official languagefs) of the Member State of sale 
to the ultimate consumer 
34. Member States are responsible for ensuring compliance with the 
principles set out in Article 30 of the EEC Treaty and Article 14 
of Directive 79/112/EEC and must accordingly permit the use in 
labelling of foreign terms and expressions, on condition that this 
does not Impair the consumer's understanding. 
-6-
35. The grounds of consumer protection which may Justify the Imposition 
of the official language(s) of a Member State no longer apply when 
foreign terms and expressions appearing on product labelling are 
easily understood and therefore fulfil their Informative function. 
36. The various exceptions to the use of the official language(s) of 
the Member State of marketing are as follows-. 
(a) Use of terms and expressions generally known to the consumer 
37. A number of terms and expressions expressed in a language foreign 
to the ultimate consumer will be familiar In the Member States 
(e.g. "made In ..."). 
(b) Use of terms which are untranslatable or have no equivalent In 
the official lanouaqefs) of the Member State of sale 
38. Where a foreign term has no equivalent in the official language(s) 
of the Member State of sale the Importer has no choice but to use 
that term. A necessarily approximative translation of the term 
would be liable to mislead the consumer. There could be no 
question of opposing the importation of the product concerned 
solely because a term did not exist in the official language(s) 
concerned. 
39. Moreover, a Member State's laws must not "crystallize given 
consumer habits" by preventing the marketing of a new product In 
Its territory (Judgments of 27 february 1980, Case 170/78 "tax 
arrangements applying to wine", and 12 March 1987, Case 178/84 
"beer purity law" paragraph 32 of the legal grounds of the 
Judgment). 
(c) Use of terms and expressions easily understood thanks to 
similarity of spelling 
40. These are terms and expressions which differ from the same words in 
the official language(s) of the Member State of marketing only In 
their spelIing. 
41. In these cases the original label of the Imported product can 
provide information on the nature of the product and may be as 
comprehensible to consumers in the importing Member State as the 
term In the official language. 
42. Original particulars concerning a characteristic of the product and 
which are close to the terms in the official language must be 
precise enough to Indicate the true nature of the product to the 
purchaser and enable him to distinguish It from products with which 
it might be confused. Examples Include coffee, lychees, mangos, 
puree and soya. 
-7-
43. With regard to the particular problem of sales names and the 
indication they give of the composition of a product the Commission 
would point out that the relevant principles were set out In 
points 14 et seq. of its communication of 24 October 1989 on the 
free movement of foodstuffs within the Community (OJ C 271, 
24 October 1989). 
E. Final remarks 
44. The Commission believes that in the labelling of foodstuffs sold to 
the ultimate consumer in the unaltered state the use of terms 
belonging to a language other than the official language(s) should, 
in practice, remain the exception. 
45. In any event, the Commission will continue to check and monitor the 
application of Article 30 of the Treaty and Article 14 of Directive 
79/112/EEC, ensuring that the consumer is properly Informed and 
that terms belonging to non-official languages may be used In the 
cases referred to In this communication. 
-8-
ISSN 0254-1475 
COM (93) 532 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN io 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-93-571-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-60269-4 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg