Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/685 |

---

(2004/C 84 E/0772)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0858/04

by Teresa Almeida Garrett (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 March 2004)

Subject:   Distortion of competition in the wine sector

On 23 February 2004 the Commission approved new rules on the labelling of wine in the European Union, which will enable third countries to use, within the Community, traditional descriptions for wine such as ‘tawny’, ‘vintage’‘ruby’ etc. and to export such wines to the EU.

The following facts should be borne in mind:

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | the port wine-producing area has always used the descriptions ‘tawny’, ‘vintage’, and ‘rub/; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Madeira wine-producers have also always used the descriptions “canteiro”, “frasqueira” and “reserva velha”; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | both these wines have consolidated their quality and international image using these expressions; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | the new labelling rules will “trivialise” the use of these expressions to the detriment of port and Madeira wine producers and their products, which in effect constitutes a distortion of competition; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | in the context of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations, the European Union has always upheld the need to adopt a balanced agreement, particularly important for non-tariff issues; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | these non-tariff measures include the protection of designations of origin, trademarks, etc.; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | the WTO negotiations have been suspended since the collapse of the Cancun Round last September; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | in this context the European Union must not or should not make any concessions outside the negotiating context of the WTO. |

Can the Commission say:

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| 1. | what induced it to adopt new rules on wine labelling outside the WTO negotiating framework; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| 2. | what it considers the European Union has gained by this unusual and unexpected concession; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| 3. | what its assessment is of the consequences of this decision for Community producers — in particular those in the port and Madeira wine producing areas? |

Joint answer

to Written Questions P-0857/04 and P-0858/04

given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(5 April 2004)

To understand the reasons which led the Commission to adopt new rules on labelling, it is important to bear in mind that, following notification of Regulation (EC) No 753/2002[(1)](#ntr1-CE2004084EN.01068502-E0001) to the WTO, some wine-producing third countries severely criticised the Regulation's content. In order to clarify the Regulation's content with the third countries, consultation meetings were organised in Geneva.

The third countries considered the Commission's policy on traditional terms to be a further example of the EU attempting to obtain exclusive protection as an intellectual property right under the Agreement on trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPS), as for geographical indications. This could have jeopardised EU policy on the protection of geographical indications and increased the risk of a WTO panel against the Commission's whole policy on wine labelling.

In the light of comments made by the third countries and in order to avert the serious threat looming for the legal soundness of current labelling legislation, the Commission decided to make a number of changes to the Regulation by creating a system which provides non-discriminatory protection for traditional terms both internally and for imported wines.

The current conditions for third countries’ use of traditional terms are equivalent to the previous conditions of use under Annex III, Part A to Regulation (EC) No 753/2002.

According to Article 1(10) of Regulation (EC) No 316/2004[(2)](#ntr2-CE2004084EN.01068502-E0002) amending Article 37(1)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 753/2002, those conditions include the following:

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| (a) | the third countries must make a substantiated request to the Commission and forward the relevant rules justifying recognition of the traditional indications; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| (b) | the language of the traditional indication must be the official language of the third country which makes the request, and the indication in that language must have been used for at least 10 years; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| (c) | if the language of the traditional indication is not the official language, its use must be provided for by the legislation of the third country in question; in that case, the traditional indication in that language must have been used continuously for at least 25 years; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| (d) | other criteria stipulated by the same Regulation, such as the indication's specific nature and distinctive character and removing the possibility of deception, must likewise be met. |

In the specific case of the Portuguese traditional terms referred to in the written question to the Commission, several conditions must therefore be met in order for them to be used in third countries. This means that, in order for a traditional term such as ‘Ruby’, Tawny', ‘Vintage’, ‘Canteiro’ or ‘Frasqueira’ to be used on a liqueur wine other than Port or Madeira, first of all either English or Portuguese must be the official language of the third country and the traditional term must have been used for at least 10 years, or English or Portuguese must be a second language recognised by the legislation of the third country in question and in that case the term must have been used for at least 25 years. The term must also be specific and distinctive, so as not to mislead the consumer if the wine is marketed in Europe. There must likewise be some tradition behind the use of the term in the third country.

The conditions governing use of the traditional term ‘Reserva velha’ by third countries remain unchanged, since that term was already listed in Annex III, Part A to Regulation (EC) No 753/2002.

---

[Top](#document1)