(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the application to register the name ‘Istarski pršut’, submitted by Croatia, was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

(2)

By the notice of opposition of 30 August 2013 and the reasoned statement of opposition of 25 October 2013, Slovenia opposed to the registration under Article 51(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012. The opposition was deemed admissible.

(3)

By letters dated 7 February 2014, the Commission invited the interested parties to engage in appropriate consultations to seek agreement among themselves in accordance with their internal procedures. A three months extension of the deadline for consultations was additionally granted, in accordance with Article 51(3), third paragraph, of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

(4)

Slovenia alleged, among other things, that the registration of ‘Istarski pršut’ did not comply with the definition of a Protected Designation of Origin in so far as the geographical area for raw materials was larger than the defined geographical area. In addition, Slovenia claimed that that registration would jeopardise the existence of ‘Istrski pršut’, i.e. the name used in Slovenia for a product having the same characteristics as ‘Istarski pršut’, and which had been legally on the market for more than five years preceding the date of the publication of the single document of ‘Istarski pršut’ in the Official Journal of the European Union.

(5)

After six months of consultations, an agreement was reached between Croatia and Slovenia. It was communicated to the Commission by letters of 3 and 10 September 2014.

(6)

Several amendments to the product specification were made following the agreement. The Croatian application became a multi-country (Croatian and Slovenian) application. The product name ‘Istarski pršut’ was changed into ‘Istarski pršut/Istrski pršut’, thus including also the name in the Slovenian language. The production area was enlarged to comprise the Slovenian part of the Istrian Peninsula. Small adjustments were further introduced to other sections of the product specification.

(7)

Since the single document had been substantially amended, in accordance with Article 51(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission repeated the scrutiny of the application and concluded that the conditions for registration were fulfilled.

(8)

With respect to the Croatian part of the area, the difference between the area for raw materials and the defined geographical area was maintained as it was in the original application. All the requirements listed in Article 5(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 being fulfilled, the name may benefit from the derogation set out in that Article and may accordingly be registered as Protected Designation of Origin.

(9)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the application to register the name ‘Istarski pršut/Istrski pršut’, submitted by Croatia and Slovenia, was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (3).

(10)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Istarski pršut/Istrski pršut’ should therefore be entered in the register,