Aromatised wine products and the fight against ‘intruders’

Revue Lamy Droit Alimentaire – November 2024
Theodore Georgopoulos

The Hauser Weinimport case was an opportunity for the CJEU to interpret, for the first time, the strict provisions of Regulation (EU) No. 251/2014 on aromatised wine products. Relying on the case in point, that of a drink made up of a blend of wine and beer, the CJEU recalls that the addition of an alcohol of non-viticultural origin, beer in the present case, is prohibited in an “aromatised cocktail of wine products”. Permission by regulation to incorporate a “flavouring foodstuff” into such a cocktail cannot be used to circumvent this prohibition.

In his article published in the November issue of Revue Lamy Droit Alimentaire, Theodore Georgopoulos comments on this decision.
He first analyses the very strict approach adopted by the CJEU, justified by the imperative of consumer protection. According to Theodore, this approach should in fact have been justified in the light of the legislator’s broader aim of ensuring fairness of commercial practices, combating unfair competition and protecting the specificity of the wine sector.

The article also highlights the CJEU’s missed opportunity to clarify the concept of “flavouring foodstuff” provided for by the above-mentioned regulation, the contours of which remain enigmatic to the detriment of operators’ legal certainty.

This article has been published on the Revue Lamy Droit Alimentaire dated November 2024. For further information, please go to Lamy website.