WRITTEN QUESTION E-2653/02

by Frank Vanhecke (NI) to the Commission

(20 September 2002)

Subject: Use of languages on labels on commercial products

In a reasoned opinion based on a judgment given by the Court of Justice of the European Union on 12 September, the Commission has drawn the French State's attention to the fact that the law prohibiting the exclusive use of English or of any language other than French on product labels violates a directive dating from 1978. In other words, in the Commission's view, France must tolerate the sale within its borders of products which are not marked with any information in French. The only condition is that a picture on the label should provide consumers with the necessary information. In this way, there is a danger that one particular language English will becoming overwhelmingly predominant with the Union, but there will also be a serious problem in countries and regions, such as Flanders, where highly complex and precarious legislation on the use of languages already exists which has been designed to maintain the political balance among the various language communities in the country.

1. Does not the Commission consider that this represents a violation of the principle of equality between the various languages?

2. Does not the Commission consider that this represents a clear violation of the principle of subsidiarity, provided for in the Maastricht Treaty? Surely, when it comes to consumer protection, national governments are in the best position to judge whether their own citizens, many of whom will be monolingual, will receive sufficient information?

3. What measure is the Commission considering in order to guarantee the equality of all official languages within the Union in future?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 2002)

The Honourable Member refers to the judgment given by the Court of Justice on 12 September 2000 (case C-366/98) in which the Court ruled that Community law precludes a national provision from requiring the use of a specific language for the labelling of foodstuffs, without allowing for the possibility for another language easily understood by purchasers to be used or for the purchaser to be informed by other means.

With regard to the reasoned opinion sent to France, the Commission was simply applying this judgment, which forms part of the consistent case-law delivered by the Court of Justice to ensure the free movement of goods in the internal market.

The Commission considers that this judgment does not represent a violation of the principle of equality between the various languages and that it does take into account the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. In fact, both Community legislation and the aforementioned case-law emphasise that the prime consideration for any national rules on the labelling of foodstuffs should be to inform and protect the consumer. Use of the national language does of course guarantee that this is the case.

However, national rules which only provided for the exclusive use of the national language, without allowing for the possibility for another language easily understood by purchasers to be used or for the purchaser to be informed by other means, go beyond what is required to protect the consumer in erecting an unjustified barrier to intra-Community trade in the products concerned, and could even, in certain cases, undermine the objective of informing the consumer.