Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb eV v TofuTown.com GmbH.
Date: 2017-06-14
26


Therefore, it is clear from point 2 that since a ‘milk product’ is derived exclusively from milk, it must contain its constituents. In that connection, the Court has already held that a milk product, in which one or other constituent of milk has been replaced, if only partially, may not be designated by one of the descriptions referred to in the point (a) of the second subparagraph of point 2 of Part III of Annex VII to Regulation No 1308/2013 (see, to that effect, judgment of 16 December 1999, UDL, C‑101/98, EU:C:1999:615, paragraphs 20 to 22). In principle, the same applies a fortiori for a purely plant-based product, of such product does not, by definition, contain any constituents of milk.
40


It follows from all of the foregoing that the term ‘milk’ and the designations reserved exclusively for milk products cannot be lawfully used to designate a purely plant-based product, unless that product appears on the list in Annex I to Decision 2010/791. The addition of descriptions or explanations indicating the plant origin of the product at issue, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, does not affect such a prohibition (see, to that effect, judgment of 16 December 1999, UDL, C‑101/98, EU:C:1999:615, paragraphs 25 to 28).
45


As regards the principle of proportionality, it requires that measures adopted by EU institutions do not exceed the limits of what is appropriate and necessary in order to attain the objectives legitimately pursued by the legislation in question; where there is a choice between several appropriate measures, recourse must be had to the least onerous, and the disadvantages caused must not be disproportionate to the aims pursued (see, to that effect, judgments of 16 December 1999, UDL, C‑101/98, EU:C:1999:615, paragraph 30, and of 17 March 2011, AJD Tuna, C‑221/09, EU:C:2011:153, paragraph 79 and the case-law cited).
46


In matters concerning the common agricultural policy, the EU legislature has a broad discretion which corresponds to the political responsibilities given to it by Articles 40 and 43 TFEU; accordingly the lawfulness of a measure adopted in that sphere can be affected only if the measure is manifestly inappropriate, having regard to the objective which the competent institution is seeking to pursue (see, to that effect, judgments of 16 December 1999, UDL, C‑101/98, EU:C:1999:615, paragraph 31, and of 17 October 2013, Schaible, C‑101/12, EU:C:2013:661, paragraph 48).
48


The fact that, in marketing or advertising, the possibility to use the term ‘milk’ and the designations reserved exclusively for milk products is available only to products which meet the requirements laid down by Annex VII, Part III, to Regulation No 1308/2013 is a guarantee, in particular, to the producers of those products of undistorted conditions for competition, and to consumers of those products, that the products designated by those designations meet all the same standards of quality, both protecting them against any confusion as to the composition of the products they intend to purchase. The provisions at issue are thus appropriate to achieve those objectives. Furthermore, they do not go beyond what is necessary to achieve them, since, as the Court has already held, the addition of descriptions or explanations to those designations to designate products which do not satisfy those requirements cannot prevent with certainty any likelihood of confusion in the mind of the consumer. Therefore, the provisions at issue, do not breach the principle of proportionality (see, to that effect, judgment of 16 December 1999, UDL, C‑101/98, EU:C:1999:615, paragraphs 32 to 34).
49


As to the principle of non-discrimination, it requires comparable situations not to be treated differently and different situations not to be treated alike unless such treatment is objectively justified (see, to that effect, judgments of 6 December 2005, ABNA and Others, C‑453/03, C‑11/04, C‑12/04 and C‑194/04, EU:C:2005:741, paragraph 63, and of 30 June 2016, Lidl, C‑134/15, EU:C:2016:498, paragraph 46).
51


Each sector of the common organisation of markets for agricultural products established by that regulation embodies features specific to it. As a result, a comparison of the technical rules and procedures adopted in order to regulate the various sectors of the market cannot constitute a valid basis for the purpose of proving the complaint of discrimination between dissimilar products which are subject to different rules. (see, to that effect, judgments of 28 October 1982, Lion and Others, 292/81 and 293/81, EU:C:1982:375, paragraph 24, and of 30 June 2016, Lidl, C‑134/15, EU:C:2016:498, paragraph 49).