Weiter zum Inhalt

Die Suche erzielte 14 Treffer.



The Response of the EU Agri-Food Chain to the COVID-19 Pandemic:Chronicles from the EU and Selected Member States Journal Artikel

Francesco Montanari, Sarah Arayess, Toma Barbarasa, Alberta Clavarino, Inês Ferreira, Aude Mahy, Stelios Margaritis, Alicja Michałowska, Christina Schröck, Arthur Servé, Agnieszka-Szymecka Wesolowska, Cesare Varallo, Pilar Velázquez González

European Food and Feed Law Review, Jahrgang 15 (2020), Ausgabe 4, Seite 336 - 356

This research article aims at providing a preliminary assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on the EU agri-food sector between March and May 2020. To this end, an analysis of the policy and legislative measures adopted during this period at EU level is first provided. Then, national experiences of nine Member States – i.e. Belgium, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Spain – are described in detail, illustrating, for each country, the most relevant impacts and responses by competent authorities and stakeholders alike. Overall, whilst one can conclude that the EU agri-food sector has shown a high degree of resilience at the onset of the pandemic, the latter has nevertheless revealed its vulnerability to external threats and, with it, the need to guarantee a proper level of preparedness to ensure, in future, food security on the EU market during similar crisis.








Belgium ∙ Ceci n’est pas du lait – This is not milk Journal Artikel

The Use of the Reserved Names “Milk”, “Yogurt” and “Dairy” for Non-Dairy Products

Yves van Couter, Aude Mahy, Florence d’Ath

European Food and Feed Law Review, Jahrgang 11 (2016), Ausgabe 4, Seite 328 - 332

On 10 March 2015, the Court of Appeals of Brussels reached its decision in a case involving a dispute between the dairy industry and a producer of substitutes for dairy products regarding the use of the words “milk”, “yogurt”, “cream” or “dairy” for presenting or advertising non-dairy products, such as almond milk or soya drinks. It reaffirmed that these generic names of dairy products are protected and are exclusively reserved for the dairy products in question. Products, therefore, which do not meet the specific legal requirements and characteristics described by these names may not, in principle, be labelled as “milk”, butter”, ”cream” or “yogurt”. In its judgement, the Court of Appeals did not, however, clarify whether the use of these reserved names for non-dairy products is prohibited in all circumstances, or whether they can sometimes be used in order to distinguish non-dairy products from milk products. Instead, the Court adhered close to the general principles of consumer protection and held that, in the circumstances at hand, the defendant’s use of these reserved names could mislead consumers as to the nature or composition of the non-dairy products.