92002E3785

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3785/02

by Bruno Gollnisch (NI) to the Commission

(17 December 2002)

Subject: Labelling in French of consumer products sold in France

On 4 August 1994 it was made compulsory under the law on the French language for French to be used in all documents intended to inform users or consumers: labels, leaflets, catalogues, brochures and other information documents.

On 20 March 2000 it was pointed out in an EU directive (a codification of an earlier one of 18 December 1978) that, under EU law, Member States may not insist upon the use of a particular language for the labelling of foodstuffs without allowing other languages to be used.

In an opinion following on from a Court of Justice judgment issued on 12 September 2000 in response to a request from the Lyons Court of Appeal for a preliminary ruling, the Commission told France that it had a period of two months within which to comply with that aspect of EU law.

By means of Decree No 2002-1025 of 1 August 2002 the French Government duly amended Article R.112-8 of its rules on consumer products in such a way as to retain the requirement for labelling in French but also to authorise (in a new subparagraph 2) wording in one or more other languages.

Does the Commission consider this amendment to the rules to be sufficient from the point of view of the above-mentioned EU law?

In other words, can a Member State retain the legitimate right to require the labels on foodstuffs sold within its territory to be written at least in its national language?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2003)

On 17 July 2002 the Commission decided to send a reasoned opinion inviting the French authorities to bring French law into line with the Court of Justice judgment of 12 September 2000 in Case C-366/98 Geffroy [2000] ECR I-6579 concerning the use of a particular language for the labelling of foodstuffs.

The Commission is currently examining Decree No 2002-1051 of 1 August 2002, which was sent to it by the French authorities following the reasoned opinion. It is also working closely with the French authorities to resolve this matter in the most appropriate manner.

The Commission itself as well as Community law and case law stress that the main purpose of legislation on labelling of foodstuffs should be to inform and protect consumers.

In practice, use of the national language constitutes a natural guarantee that these imperatives are met. However, it should not give rise to the adoption of disproportionate and unjustified measures which could actually undermine the objective of providing consumers with information.

On the basis of case law, the Commission takes the view that national legislation should allow the use of specific foreign words on labelling where this ensures that consumers are informed or even in some cases better informed. Examples include the names of foreign recipes with no French equivalent. In such cases, the name in the original language provides consumers with information more effectively than a French expression.

Far from seeking to restrict the use of a given language, the Commission's decision thus mirrors its determination to promote trade in goods which so often reflect Europe's cultural diversity and to ensure as far as possible that consumers are properly informed about the nature of these products.