WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1109/98 by Luigi FLORIO to the Commission. Protection of European wines with designations of origin
Date: 1998-03-30
Institutions: European Parliament, FLORIO
Subjects: United States, World Trade Organisation, bilateral agreement, designation of origin, viticulture, wine of superior quality

19. 11. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 354/63

established that there has been any infringement, any publicity would be premature and could jeopardise the
dialogue with the Member State, making it more difficult to subsequently resolve any infringement. In other
words, Article 169 letters must be clearly distinguished from reasoned opinions, in which the Commission sets
out its final position and which are usually publicised.

There are, however, two exceptions to this procedure. It does not apply:

›  where Member States have failed to notify the Commission of national measures implementing directives or
have failed to comply with rulings of the Court of Justice; this is because the matters are already in the public
domain;

›  where  the  Commission  decides  that  publicity  is  necessary  because  the  issue  is  already  being  publicly
discussed and there is a need to stop false rumours spreading, in which case the decision to go public or not is
taken on a case-by-case basis.

It should also be noted that where the infringement procedure has been triggered by a complaint, the party who
made the complaint is kept informed at each stage in the procedure, including the sending of the Article 169
letter.

It goes without saying that the Commission is always prepared to respond to parliamentary questions on specific
cases.

(98/C 354/105)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1109/98

by Luigi Florio (PPE) to the Commission

(30 March 1998)

Subject: Protection of European wines with designations of origin

Is the Commission aware that certain winegrowers in the United States produce wine that is then marketed using
the names of some of the most famous European, and in particular Italian, wines with designations of origin?

This problem is due to the fact that there are no instruments for the legal protection of wines with designations of
origin  in  non-European  countries  which  have  not  signed  the  Lisbon  Agreement  in  the  context  of  the  GATT
Agreements.

Does the Commission agree that it should take measures to prevent the problem from spreading and thereby
causing extremely serious damage to the European wine-growing sector by undermining the image of our most
prestigious wines and their presence on the internal and international markets?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 1998)

The Commission is aware of the matter brought to its attention by the Honourable Member.

The  World  Trade  Organisation  (WTO)  agreement  on  the  trade-related  aspects  of  intellectual  property  rights
(TRIPs), signed by the Community in 1994, requires WTO members to protect the geographical designations of
other  members.  Exceptions  are  provided  for,  however,  particularly  under  Article  24(4),  which  permits  WTO
members who have been using continuously for at least 10 year prior to 15 April 1994, or in good faith, specific
geographical designations belonging to other members and identifying wines or spirits with persons living in
those geographical areas, to continue to do so in a similar way.

While seeing to it that its rights under the WTO are respected, the Community has the priority objective in the
wine-growing  sector  also  of  concluding  bilateral  agreements  to  improve  the  protection  for  geographical
designations as provided for in Article 24(1) of the agreement.

Concerning the matter notified by the Honourable Member, the Commission is making every effort to ensure that
negotiations can be conducted on this aspect with the United States.