Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62015TJ0043

    Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 23 April 2018.
    CRM Srl v European Commission.
    Protected geographical indication — Piadina Romagnola or Piada Romagnola — Registration procedure — Allocation of powers as between the Commission and the national authorities — Link between the product’s reputation and its geographical origin — Article 5(2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1151/2012 — Scope of the Commission’s check of the application for registration — Article 7(1)(f)(ii), Article 8(1)(c)(ii) and Article 50(1) of Regulation No 1151/2012 — Effects on the procedure before the Commission of annulment of the specification by a national court — Obligation of the Commission to conduct inquiries — Principle of good administration — Effective judicial protection.
    Case T-43/15.

    Court reports – general – 'Information on unpublished decisions' section

    Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 23 April 2018 –
    CRM v Commission

    (Case T‑43/15)

    (Protected geographical indication — Piadina Romagnola or Piada Romagnola — Registration procedure — Allocation of powers as between the Commission and the national authorities — Link between the product’s reputation and its geographical origin — Article 5(2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1151/2012 — Scope of the Commission’s check of the application for registration — Article 7(1)(f)(ii), Article 8(1)(c)(ii) and Article 50(1) of Regulation No 1151/2012 — Effects on the procedure before the Commission of annulment of the specification by a national court — Obligation of the Commission to conduct inquiries — Principle of good administration — Effective judicial protection)

    1. 

    Agriculture—Uniform legislation—Protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs—Regulation No 1151/2012—Allocation of powers as between the Member States and the Commission

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1151/2012, Recital 58 and Art. 50)

    (see paras 34-37)

    2. 

    Agriculture—Uniform legislation—Protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs—Regulation No 1151/2012—Requirements applicable to protected geographic indications—Requirement of having a reputation—Scope

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1151/2012, Art. 5(2)(b))

    (see paras 45-47, 49)

    3. 

    Agriculture—Uniform legislation—Protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs—Regulation No 1151/2012—Registration procedure—Commission obligation to determine whether the conditions for registration are met—Scope—Failure to evaluate the consequences of the annulment by a national court of a specification and an application for registration—Not permissible—Infringement of the duty to conduct inquiries and the principle of good administration

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1151/2012, Recital 58 and Art. 50(1))

    (see paras 67, 73-75, 85-88, 91)

    4. 

    EU law—Principles—Principle of sound administration—Duty of diligence—Scope

    (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41)

    (see paras 69, 70)

    5. 

    Agriculture—Uniform legislation—Protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs—Regulation no 1151/2012—Procedures to amend or annul a registration—Application to address the shortcomings in the registration procedure which occurred in infringement of the principle of good administration—Not included

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1151/2012, Arts 53 and 54)

    (see para. 82)

    6. 

    Agriculture—Uniform legislation—Protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs—Regulation No 1151/2012—Registration procedure—Commission obligation to determine whether the conditions for registration are met—Scope—Failure to evaluate the consequences of the annulment by a national court of specifications and an application for registration—Infringement of the right to effective judicial protection—None

    (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47; European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1151/2012, Art. 49(4))

    (see paras 98, 100-102)

    7. 

    Judicial proceedings—Costs—Costs caused unreasonably or vexatiously—Conduct of an institution making a dispute more likely

    (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 135(2))

    (see paras 105, 106)

    Re:

    Application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1174/2014 of 24 October 2014 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Piadina Romagnola/Piada Romagnola (PGI)) (OJ 2014 L 316, p. 3).

    Operative part

    The Court:

    1. 

    Dismisses the action;

    2. 

    Orders CRM srl to bear two thirds of its own costs and to pay two thirds of the costs incurred by the European Commission in the present proceedings;

    3. 

    Orders the Commission to bear one third of its own costs and one third of the costs incurred by CRM in the present proceedings;

    4. 

    Orders CRM and the Commission to each bear their own costs relating to the proceedings for interim measures;

    5. 

    Orders the Italian Republic and the Consorzio di Promozione e Tutela della Piadina Romagnola (Co.P.Rom) to bear their own costs.

    Top