WRITTEN QUESTION E-2013/03 by Robert Goebbels (PSE) to the Commission. Regulation on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs.
Date: 2003-06-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: application of EU law, case-law (EU), cheese, designation of origin, intra-EU trade, judgment of the Court (EU), location of production, meat product, preparation for market, technical barriers to trade

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/199

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(30 July 2003)

A list of projects cofinanced with non-governmental organisations belonging to these networks during the
period 1997-2000 under budget heading B7-6000 will be sent direct to the Honourable Member and
Parliament’s secretariat.

A detailed list of humanitarian projects financed by ECHO and carried out by NGOs for victims of natural
or manmade disasters in third countries will also be sent to the Honourable Member and Parliament’s
secretariat. Projects have been financed primarily under headings B7-210 (humanitarian aid) and B7-219
(disaster preparedness). Funding was also provided until 1999 under headings B7-214, B7-215, B7-217
and B7-219 and the 8th European Development Fund.

(2004/C 33 E/202)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2013/03

by Robert Goebbels (PSE) to the Commission

(17 June 2003)

Subject: Regulation on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural

products and foodstuffs

The European Court of Justice recently handed down what is, in my view, a questionable ruling that
‘maintaining the quality and reputation of’Grana Padano‘cheese and’Parma ham‘justifies the rule that the
product must be grated or sliced and packaged in the region of production’.

The extension of the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin to the packaging of
products of this type is all the more debatable in that the cheeses and hams to be protected are frequently
made from milk or pork not produced in the region but imported from abroad.

Does not the Commission take the view that Council Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 535/97 (1) of
17 March 1997 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 (2)) on the protection of geographical indications
and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs needs to be adjusted so as to eliminate
the abusive advantages introduced by the new case-law of the Court which, in the final analysis, constitutes
an obstacle to the single market?

(1) OJ L 83, 25.3.1997, p. 3.
(2) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 August 2003)

The Commission considers that the Court of Justice’s judgments of 20 May 2003 in cases C-108/01 and
C-469/00 relating to the protected designations of origin Parma ham and Grana Padano respectively
confirm the scope of the protection it had itself extended to these designations.

The Commission shares the Court’s view that specification requirements that certain operations such as
grating, slicing and packaging be carried out in the geographical production zone are in fact necessary for
protection of the PDO in question.

It is true that such requirements are measures of equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction, prohibited
under the principle of free circulation of goods laid down in the EC Treaty. But the PDOs as industrial and
commercial property rights constitute one of the exceptions provided for in the Treaty and need to be
protected against misuse by third parties wishing to profit from the reputation they and the associated
trade marks have acquired.

C 33 E/200

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

In examining applications for registration the Commission is particularly careful to confirm that such
provisions, if included in the specification, are shown to be necessary for protection of the name. This
stops unfair advantages arising that are in fact a barrier to the free circulation of goods.

Contrary to what the Honourable Member appears to think the raw materials from which PDO Parma ham
and Grana Padano are made must come from geographical zones that are precisely delimited in the
specification and thus may not be imported from abroad.

Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 of 14 July 1992 on the protection of geographical indications and
designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1) was in fact amended in April 2003 by
Council Regulation (EC) No 692/2003 of 8 April 2003 (2) in order to make it clear that specifications may
include compelling reasons for restricting certain market preparation operations to the geographical zone
of production. This amendment corresponds to the Court’s interpretation and the Commission has no
intention of proposing any adjustment of the Regulation.

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992.
(2) OJ L 99, 17.4.2003.

(2004/C 33 E/203)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2015/03

by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 June 2003)

Subject: Transfer of the ‘castrum’ of San Gimignano into private ownership

The development of the town of San Gimignano began in the Middle Ages around the ‘castrum’, the
ancient and vast fortified complex of dwellings, which was turned into the convent of San Domenico.

It was purchased by the State and used as a prison in the past. For years the municipality of San
Gimignano has been trying in vain to get it back, on the basis of the right of the local community to make
use of the public areas in its historic centre, especially those inside the original city walls, and by virtue of
a municipal council act passed in 1999 concerning a project for its recovery and restoration.

However, the Italian Government, on the strength of Articles 7 and 8 of Law No 112 of 15 June 2002,
which provide for the transfer of national heritage sites for budgetary reasons or in order to build facilities,
arranged for the ‘castrum’
to be sold to private purchasers, who intend to build a hotel and an
underground garage, which would destroy one of the most important masterpieces of town planning in
medieval and modern history. The plan has been opposed jointly by local public and private bodies and is
a cause of concern to Unesco, which has declared the historic centre of San Gimignano a world heritage
site.

Furthermore, according to Article 151 of the EC Treaty ‘Action by the Community shall be aimed at
encouraging cooperation between Member States’
(which are signatories to the Convention for the
Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe) and the competent international organisations’in the
area of conservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage of European significance’.

In view of this, can the Commission say what steps it will support or take to prevent the execution of this
unfortunate project and encourage the Italian Government to hand the ‘castrum’ of San Gimignano back to
the municipality?