Leonie Evans

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 17 (2022), Issue 5, Page 337 - 337

Leonie Evans

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 17 (2022), Issue 4, Page 283 - 283

Leonie Evans

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 17 (2022), Issue 6, Page 385 - 385

Leonie Evans

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 17 (2022), Issue 1, Page 1 - 1

Leonie Evans

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 17 (2022), Issue 2, Page 119 - 119

Leonie Evans

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 17 (2022), Issue 3, Page 201 - 201

Leonie Evans

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 16 (2021), Issue 6, Page 477 - 477

Andreas Meisterernst, Leonie Evans

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 15 (2020), Issue 3, Page 202 - 211

The French Nutri-Score® is on its way to success. The approach of a simple depiction explaining which foods are better or worse than others is politically convincing. There have been enough models for symbols: the British traffic light, the Scandinavian key-hole system and, more recently, the Italian battery model. As propagated by consumer protection associations and NGOs, they are all designed to provide quick and concise information to the (thus probably volatile) consumer who is overwhelmed by the perception of the nutrition declaration and the list of ingredients. Germany has now decided to implement the French Nutri-Score® system as well. The legal basis found for the Nutri-Score® in EU law differs in the several member states which introduced it. This topic will be discussed in this article as well as the issue of how the new labelling could be officially monitored.

Leonie Evans

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 13 (2018), Issue 3, Page 213 - 213

Leonie Evans

European Food and Feed Law Review, Volume 13 (2018), Issue 2, Page 101 - 101