Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62018CN0524

Case C-524/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 10 August 2018 — Dr. Willmar Schwabe GmbH & Co.KG v Queisser Pharma GmbH & Co. KG

OJ C 392, 29.10.2018, p. 9–9 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

29.10.2018   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/9


Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 10 August 2018 — Dr. Willmar Schwabe GmbH & Co.KG v Queisser Pharma GmbH & Co. KG

(Case C-524/18)

(2018/C 392/13)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Dr. Willmar Schwabe GmbH & Co.KG

Defendant: Queisser Pharma GmbH & Co. KG

Questions referred

1.

Is a reference to general, non-specific health-related benefits ‘accompanied’ within the meaning of Article 10(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 (1) by specific health claims in accordance with one of the lists provided for in Article 13 or 14 of that regulation even if that reference is situated on the front and the authorised claims are situated on the back of an outer packaging and, in the perception of the public, although the claims are clearly related to the reference in terms of content, the reference does not contain a clear indication, marked with an asterisk for example, to the claims on the back?

2.

Does evidence within the meaning of Article 5(1)(a) and Article 6(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 also need to be provided in the case of reference being made to general, non-specific benefits within the meaning of Article 10(3) of that regulation?


(1)  Commission Regulation (EU) No 1047/2012 of 8 November 2012 amending Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 with regard to the list of nutrition claims Text with EEA relevance, OJ 2012 L 310, p. 36.


Top