WRITTEN QUESTION No. 411/99 by Honório NOVO Use of the designation 'Port' for wines produced in Australia
Date: 1999-03-01
Institutions: European Parliament, NOVO
Subjects: Australia, Portugal, agreement (EU), designation of origin, export, location of production, product designation, trade agreement, wine

C 370/38

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.12.1999

If that information is correct, it clearly contradicts the information supplied to me by the Commission on
17 October 1997 and quoted above.

What remarks would the Commission make on this contradiction?

(1) OJ C 117, 16.4.1998, p. 41.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 1999)

The Commission can only confirm its position as set out in its answers to Mr Barros Moura’s question
E-2485/97 (1) and the Honourable Member’s E-2674/97 on strengthening the protection of geographical
indications and designations of origin for wine and spirits in the context of negotiations with third
countries. With regard to port, this objective was confirmed at the time of the European summit in Berlin
on the occasion of the conclusion of the agreement with South Africa (see also in this connection the
Commission’s answer to the Honourable Member’s written question E-408/99 (2)).

(1) OJ C 82, 17.3.1998.
(2) OJ C 348, 3.12.1999, p. 63.

(1999/C 370/049)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0411/99

by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Use of the designation ‘Port’ for wines produced in Australia

(1 March 1999)

By virtue of the multilateral Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS
Agreement), particularly section 3 of part 2 of the Agreement, Article 23 and Article 24(4), and by virtue
of the 1994 agreement on trade in wine signed with Australia, that country has undertaken to renounce
the use of all ’semi-generic’ designations including the term ‘Port’ after fixed transitional periods and to
grant exclusive and absolute protection to Community wines.

1.
In this context, can the Commission provide the following information: Under the 1994 agreement
on trade in wine with Australia, has that country also renounced use of the term ‘Port’ for wines produced
in that country and destined for internal Australian trade?

2. When will the transitional periods under the agreement, after which Australia will be banned from
using the term Port on wines produced in that country for third countries, specifically for the EU, expire?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

Under the 1994 Agreement between the Community and Australia on trade in wine (1), Australia
1.
committed itself
‘semi-generic’ designations containing a Community
geographical reference, including the term ‘Port’. This commitment, which concerns a total of 23 designa-
tions, applies both to the Australian market and export markets.

to giving up the use of all

The semi-generic designation ‘Port’ is one of the third group of names referred to in Article 8(1)(c) of
2.
the Agreement for which transition periods still remain to be fixed. Negotiations between the Commission
and the Australian Government on fixing the duration of these periods are nearing completion and a
formal decision is expected this year. This decision will also apply to Australian exports to third countries.
In any event, the Agreement contains no provision enabling Australia to market in the Community
Australian wines using the designation ‘Port’. Ever since Portuguese accession, Community wine legislation
has prohibited the use of the name ‘Port’ for wines other than those originating in Portugal.

(1) OJ L 86, 31.3.1994.