Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10032 — Goldman Sachs Group/Insight Venture Management/InhabitIQ Parent)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 434/01)

On 8 December 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

—	in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

—	in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M10032. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9973 — SK Capital Partners/Venator Materials)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 434/02)

On 9 December 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

—	in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

—	in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9973. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10046 — Deutsche Telekom/SK Telecom/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 434/03)

On 10 December 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

—	in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

—	in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M10046. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

Euro exchange rates (1)

14 December 2020

(2020/C 434/04)

1 euro =

	Currency	Exchange rate
USD	US dollar	1,2162
JPY	Japanese yen	126,11
DKK	Danish krone	7,4421
GBP	Pound sterling	0,90700
SEK	Swedish krona	10,1930
CHF	Swiss franc	1,0776
ISK	Iceland króna	155,00
NOK	Norwegian krone	10,5833
BGN	Bulgarian lev	1,9558
CZK	Czech koruna	26,317
HUF	Hungarian forint	353,63
PLN	Polish zloty	4,4373
RON	Romanian leu	4,8707
TRY	Turkish lira	9,5728
AUD	Australian dollar	1,6064
CAD	Canadian dollar	1,5476
HKD	Hong Kong dollar	9,4274
NZD	New Zealand dollar	1,7101
SGD	Singapore dollar	1,6202
KRW	South Korean won	1 327,50
ZAR	South African rand	18,2339
CNY	Chinese yuan renminbi	7,9588
HRK	Croatian kuna	7,5290
IDR	Indonesian rupiah	17 216,41
MYR	Malaysian ringgit	4,9299
PHP	Philippine peso	58,417
RUB	Russian rouble	88,7888
THB	Thai baht	36,583
BRL	Brazilian real	6,1237
MXN	Mexican peso	24,3753
INR	Indian rupee	89,4505

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Commission notice on the results of the evaluation of equivalence of marketing standards for eggs applicable in the United Kingdom to the relevant Union legislation

(Published in accordance with Article 30(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 of 23 June 2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards marketing standards for eggs ( OJ L 163, 24.6.2008, p. 6))

(2020/C 434/05)

Following a request by the United Kingdom, an evaluation of equivalence for egg marketing standards was carried out in relation to rules applicable in the United Kingdom (1)to conform to EU marketing standards for eggs in accordance with Article 30(1) of Regulation (EC) No 589/2008.

It is hereby notified that as concerns egg marketing standards equivalence is confirmed.

---

(1)  In accordance with the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 5(4) of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland in conjunction with Annex 2 to that Protocol, for the purposes of this Notice references to the United Kingdom do not include Northern Ireland.

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting on 25 September 2019 regarding a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.40127 – Canned vegetables

Rapporteur: Ireland

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 434/06)

---

(1)  OJ L 1, 4.1,2003, p. 1.

Final Report of the Hearing Officer (1)

Case AT.40127 – Canned vegetables

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 434/07)

The present report concerns a draft cartel settlement decision to be adopted in accordance with the procedure foreseen in Article 10a of Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (2) (the ‘Draft Decision’).

The Draft Decision is addressed to Bonduelle (3), Coroos (4), and Groupe CECAB (5) (collectively ‘the Settling Parties’).

According to the Draft Decision, the Settling Parties participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101(1) of the TFEU and Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement between 19 January 2000 and 1 October 2013, consisting in price coordination, market sharing and the exchange of commercially sensitive information in relation to the sale of certain types of canned vegetables to retailers and/or the food service industry in the EEA.

On 17 February 2017, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 against the Settling Parties and one other undertaking. (6)

Following settlement discussions (7) and settlement submissions (8) in accordance with Article 10a(2) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004, the Commission adopted a Statement of Objections (‘SO’) on 25 July 2019 addressed to the Settling Parties.

In their respective replies to the SO the Settling Parties confirmed pursuant to Article 10a(3) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 that the SO reflected the contents of their settlement submissions.

Pursuant to Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU, I have examined whether the Draft Decision deals only with objections in respect of which the Settling Parties have been afforded the opportunity of making known their views. I conclude that it does so.

In view of the above, and taking into account that the Settling Parties have not addressed any requests or complaints to me (9), I consider that the effective exercise of the procedural rights of the Settling Parties to the proceedings in this case has been respected.

---

(1)  Pursuant to Articles 16 and 17 of Decision 2011/695/EU of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 275, 20.10.2011, p. 29).

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 18) as last amended by Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/1348 (OJ L 208, 5.8.2015, p. 3) (‘Regulation No 773/2004’).

(3)  Bonduelle SCA, Bonduelle SA (formerly Bonduelle SAS) and Bonduelle Europe Long Life SAS.

(4)  Coroos International NV, Coroos Beheer BV and Coroos Conserven BV.

(5)  Centrale Cooperative Agricole Bretonne SCA, Compagnie Generale de Conserve SAS and GIE Groupe d'aucy (formerly GIE Groupe CECAB).

(6)  At the time of the present report, proceedings concerning this other undertaking are ongoing under the general (non-settlement) provisions of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004.

(7)  Settlement discussions took place between March 2017 and June 2019.

(8)  The Settling Parties submitted their formal requests to settle between [...].

(9)  Under Article 15(2) of Decision 2011/695/EU, parties to the proceedings in cartel cases, which engage in settlement discussions pursuant to Article 10a of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004, may call upon the hearing officer at any stage during the settlement procedure in order to ensure the effective exercise of their procedural rights. See also paragraph 18 of Commission Notice 2008/C 167/01 on the conduct of settlement procedures in view of the adoption of Decisions pursuant to Article 7 and Article 23 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in cartel cases (OJ C 167, 2.7.2008, p. 1).

Summary of Commission Decision

of 27 September 2019

relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement

(Case AT.40127 – Canned vegetables)

(notified under document C(2019) 6903)

(Only the English text is authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 434/08)

On 27 September 2019, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (1) , the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets.

1.   INTRODUCTION

(1)

The Decision relates to a single and continuous infringement of Article 101(1) of the Treaty and Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement. The infringement consisted in price coordination, market sharing and exchange of sensitive information in relation to the sales of certain type of canned vegetables to retailers and/or the food service industry in the EEA.

(2)

The Decision is addressed to the following legal entities (referred to collectively as ‘addressees’ or individually as ‘addressee’): Bonduelle SCA, Bonduelle SA and Bonduelle Europe Long Life SAS (together, ‘Bonduelle’); Coroos International NV, Coroos Beheer BV and Coroos Conserven BV (together, ‘Coroos’); and Centrale Coopérative Agricole Bretonne SCA, Compagnie Générale de Conserve SAS and GIE Groupe d’aucy (together, ‘Groupe CECAB’).

2.   CASE DESCRIPTION

2.1.   Procedure

(3)

Following an immunity application by Bonduelle on 11 June 2013, the Commission carried out unannounced inspections in October 2013 at the premises of various producers of canned vegetables. Groupe CECAB and Coroos applied for reductions of fines pursuant to the Commission’s Leniency Notice (2), respectively on 20 November 2013 and 13 February 2014.

(4)

On 17 February 2017, the Commission initiated proceedings under Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 and Article 2(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (3) against the addressees of the Decision and another party with a view to engaging in settlement discussions with them under the Settlement Notice (4). Settlement discussions with the addressees took place between March 2017 and June 2019. Each addressee then submitted its formal request to settle pursuant to Article 10a(2) of Regulation (EC) No773/2004.

(5)

On 25 July 2019, the Commission adopted a statement of objections addressed to Bonduelle, Coroos and Groupe CECAB. The addressees replied to the statement of objections by confirming that it reflected the contents of their settlement submissions and that they remained committed to following the settlement procedure.

(6)

The Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions issued a favourable opinion on 25 September 2019.

(7)

The Commission adopted the Decision on 27 September 2019.

2.2.   Summary of the infringement

(8)

The Decision concerns an infringement relating to the sale of certain types of canned vegetables to retailers and/or the food service industry.

(9)

The addressees participated in three closely inter-related horizontal agreements through which they coordinated their commercial conduct on the market: an agreement covering private label sales (sold under retailers’ brands) of canned vegetables such as green beans, peas, peas and carrots mix, and vegetable macedoine to retailers in the EEA, in particular in Belgium, Germany, France and the Netherlands; an agreement covering private label sales (sold under retailers’ brands, as above) of canned sweetcorn to retailers in the EEA, in particular in Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Ireland, Spain, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Norway, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom; and an agreement covering both own brands and private label sales of all types of canned vegetables (5), including mixes of vegetables and canned vegetable preparations and dishes (but excluding mixes, salads and preparations that do not have vegetables as their main ingredient) to retailers (6) and to the food service industry in France. Coroos participated only in the first agreement while Bonduelle and Groupe CECAB participated in all three.

(10)

The infringement consisted in the fixing of selling prices (price increases, minimum prices, target prices) and the coordination of pricing policy and pricing structure; the allocation of volume quotas and market shares; the allocation of customers and markets; the coordination of tenders and price offers to be submitted to retailers and/or the food service industry; the coordination of other sales conditions and rebates, including marketing strategy and promotional policy; and the exchange of commercially sensitive information.

(11)

The infringement covered the entire EEA and lasted from 19 January 2000 until 1 October 2013.

2.3.   Addressees and duration

(12)

The addressees of the Decision are held liable for the infringement for the following durations: Addressees Duration Bonduelle SCA, Bonduelle SA and Bonduelle Europe Long Life SAS 19 January 2000-11 June 2013 Coroos International NV, Coroos Beheer BV and Coroos Conserven BV 19 January 2000-1 October 2013 Centrale Coopérative Agricole Bretonne SCA, Compagnie Générale de Conserve SAS and GIE Groupe d’aucy 19 January 2000-1 October 2013

2.4.   Remedies

(13)

The Decision applies the 2006 Fines Guidelines (7). With the exception of Bonduelle SCA, Bonduelle SA and Bonduelle Europe Long Life SAS, the Decision imposes fines on all the entities listed under point (12) above.

2.4.1.   Basic amount of the fine

(14)

In setting the fines, the Commission took into account the average of each addressee’s sales of the canned vegetables covered by the cartel within the EEA for the period 2000-2013, the fact that price coordination and market sharing are among the most harmful restrictions of competition, the duration of the infringement, the fact that the infringement covered the entire EEA and that it was thoroughly implemented, and an additional amount to deter undertakings from entering into such practices.

2.4.2.   Adjustments to the basic amount

(15)

The Commission did not apply any aggravating or mitigating circumstances.

2.4.3.   Application of the 10 % turnover limit

(16)

For all addressees, the basic amount of the fine (before the application of the leniency and settlement reductions) exceeded 10 % of their total worldwide turnover in the business year preceding the date of the Decision. The basic amounts of the fines were therefore capped to those limits.

2.4.4.   Application of the 2006 Leniency Notice

(17)

The Commission granted Bonduelle full immunity from fines. The Commission granted Groupe CECAB a 30 % reduction of its fine and granted Coroos a 15 % reduction of its fine.

2.4.5.   Application of the Settlement Notice

(18)

As a result of the application of the Settlement Notice, the amount of the fines imposed on Groupe CECAB and Coroos was further reduced by 10 %.

2.4.6.   Inability to pay

(19)

One addressee submitted an application for a reduction of its fine on the grounds of inability to pay. The Commission assessed this application and concluded that it should be accepted.

3.   CONCLUSION

(20)

The following fines were imposed pursuant to Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003: (a) Bonduelle SCA, Bonduelle SA and Bonduelle Europe Long Life SAS, jointly and severally: EUR 0; (b) Coroos International NV, Coroos Beheer BV and Coroos Conserven BV, jointly and severally: EUR 13 647 000; (c) Centrale Coopérative Agricole Bretonne SCA, Compagnie Générale de Conserve SAS and GIE Groupe d’aucy, jointly and severally: EUR 18 000 000.

---

(1)  OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Notice on Immunity from fines and reduction of fines in cartel cases (OJ C 298, 8.12.2006, p. 17).

(3)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 18), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 622/2008 (OJ L 171, 1.7.2008, p. 3) and by Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/1348 (OJ L 208, 5.8.2015, p. 3).

(4)  Commission Notice on the conduct of settlement procedures in view of the adoption of Decisions pursuant to Article 7 and Article 23 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in cartel cases (OJ C 167, 2.7.2008, p. 1).

(5)  Except canned tomatoes, mushrooms, condiments or olives, and canned products having these as main ingredients.

(6)  Sales of private label products to retailers concerned only the products not covered by the other two agreements.

(7)  Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (OJ C 210, 1.9.2006, p. 2).

Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to the product specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33

(2020/C 434/09)

This notice is published in accordance with Article 17(5) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 (1).

COMMUNICATING A STANDARD AMENDMENT

‘MINERVOIS-LA-LIVINIÈRE’

PDO-FR-A0667-AM01

Submitted on: 9 September 2020

DESCRIPTION OF AND REASONS FOR THE APPROVED AMENDMENT

1.   Yield

In Chapter I, Section VIII of the specification, on the yield of PDO wines, the basic yield has been reduced from 45 to 42 hl/ha and the maximum yield has been reduced from 54 to 51 hl/ha, to bring them into line with the yields for wines with a designation of origin produced in the Minervois region.

The amendment to the maximum yield has also been included in the single document, under ‘Maximum yields’.

2.   Growing methods

In Chapter I, Section VI of the specification, on the tending of vineyards,

—	the rules on planting density have been supplemented to allow for vines planted as of 31 July 2019, which may have a maximum density of 4 200 plants per hectare, instead of 4 000 plants;

—	foliage height for trained vines is increased from 1,40 m2 to 1,60 m2 of external surface of vegetation cover for the production of 1 kg of grapes, which is more in line with the fixed yield;

—	the average maximum load per parcel has been reduced from 7 500 to 7 000 plants per hectare.

These changes to the specification bring production conditions into line with the reality on the ground.

These amendments have also been included in the single document, under ‘Wine-making practices’.

3.   Analytical characteristics of the product

In Chapter I, Section VII of the specification, on harvesting, the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume has been increased from 12,5 % to 13 %, and the level at which grapes are considered ripe has been set at a sugar content of less than 218 g/l of must rather than 212 g/l of must. These changes to the specification bring production conditions into line with the reality on the ground.

These amendments have also been included in the single document, under ‘Analytical characteristics’ in the section ‘Description of the wine(s)’.

4.   Blending of varieties

In Section IX of the specification, the rules on the blending of varieties state that the proportion of the Carignan N, Cinsaut N, Grenache N, Mourvèdre N and Syrah N varieties combined must be greater than or equal to 80 % of the blend, and the fact that no single variety may account for more than 80 % of the blend has been added.

This amendment has also been included in the single document, under ‘Wine-making practices’.

5.   Date of circulation of wines

In Section IX of the specification, on the processing and packaging of the wines, the requirement to indicate the dates of circulation of the wines among traders and the date on which the wines are placed on the market for sale to the consumer has been removed, to eliminate the risk of unfair competition among operators.

This requirement has also been removed from the ‘Specific oenological practices’ section of the single document.

6.   Link with the geographical area

In Chapter I, Section X of the specification, on the link with the geographical area, the production figures for these wines of designated origin have been updated using the figures for the 2018 harvest, to specify that 11 000 hl were produced by 45 producers, including 2 wine cooperatives, which produced 20 % of the volume.

These figures have been updated in the single document, under ‘Link with the geographical area’.

In Chapter I, Section X of the specification, on the link with the geographical area, the fact that the wines also reveal spicy notes has been added to the organoleptic description of the wines.

This addition has also been included in the single document, under ‘Organoleptic characteristics’ in the section ‘Description of the wine(s)’.

7.   Declaration obligations

In Chapter II of the specification, on the declaration obligations of producers of the designation, the following obligations have been added:

—	a document identifying the parcels suitable for irrigation must be attached to the prior declaration for parcels assigned to production of the designation.

—	the claim declaration must be accompanied by a copy of the harvest declaration and, where appropriate, a copy of the production declaration or an extract from the stock records for grape and must buyers.

These amendments do not affect the single document.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

1.   Name of the product

Minervois-la-Livinière

2.   Geographical indication type

PDO – Protected Designation of Origin

3.   Categories of grapevine product

1.

Wine

4.   Description of the wine(s)

Analytical characteristics

These are still, dry red wines.

—	The wines have a minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of 13 %, and the grapes are considered ripe if they have a sugar content less than 218 g/l of must.

—	The red wines ready to be marketed in bulk or packaged have a malic acid content less than or equal to 0,4 g/l.

—

The wines ready to be marketed in bulk or packaged must have a fermentable sugar content (glucose and fructose): — less than or equal to 3 g/l for wines with a natural alcoholic strength by volume less than or equal to 14 %; — less than or equal to 4 g/l for wines with a natural alcoholic strength by volume greater than 14 %.

—

The total acidity, volatile acidity and total sulphur dioxide contents are those laid down in EU legislation. General analytical characteristics Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)   Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)   Minimum total acidity   Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)   Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

Organoleptic characteristics

The wines are produced by blending several varieties, in keeping with the tradition of the vineyards of the Languedoc, with most of the blend accounted for by the Grenache N, Mourvèdre N and Syrah N varieties. The wines have an intense purple colour, with shades of terra cotta, and a rich, dense body.

These are complex wines that evolve into notes of spices and cooked or candied fruit, complemented by scents of vanilla or cocoa when aged in oak barrels.

Always powerful and warm, they are long-lasting, concentrated and tannic, but always well balanced. These are wines that keep well, preserving their melt-in-the-mouth, velvety qualities, and that gentle heat and fruitiness so characteristic of the great wines of the South of France.

5.   Wine-making practices

a.   Specific oenological practices

Growing method

The minimum vine planting density is 4 000 plants per hectare. For vineyards planted after 31 July 2019, the minimum vine planting density is 4 200 plants per hectare.

The spacing between the rows is less than or equal to 2,50 m.

The area available for each plant must not exceed 2,5 m2. This surface area is obtained by multiplying the spacing between the rows by the spacing between the plants.

—	Pruning must take place before phenological stage E (according to Baggionili), with three leaves unfolded on the first two buds.

—	The vines are pruned using short pruning, with a maximum of 12 buds per plant; each spur has a maximum of two buds.

—	Single Guyot pruning may be used for the Syrah N variety, with a maximum of 10 buds per plant, including no more than six on the cane, and no more than two replacement spurs with a maximum of two buds each.

—	The foliage height for trained vines must provide 1,60 m2 of external surface of vegetation cover for the production of 1 kg of grapes; this rule applies from 30 June each year.

—	The average maximum crop load per parcel is set at 7 000 kg per hectare.

—	Irrigation may be authorised.

Specific oenological practice

The wines are produced by blending the grapes, must or wines of at least two varieties.

—	The proportion of the Grenache N, Lledonner pelut N, Mourvèdre N and Syrah N varieties combined must be greater than or equal to 40 % of the blend.

—	The proportion of the Carignan N, Cinsaut N, Grenache N, Mourvèdre N and Syrah N varieties combined must be greater than or equal to 80 % of the blend, with no single variety accounting for more than 80 % of the blend.

—	The wines must be aged until at least 15 October of the year following the harvest.

—	The use of thermovinification, continuous fermentation tanks, marc-recycling tanks, vertical stemmers, screw-type separators or continuous presses is prohibited.

All wine-making practices followed must comply with the requirements laid down at EU level and in the Rural and Maritime Fishing Code.

b.   Maximum yields

51 hectolitres per hectare

6.   Demarcated geographical area

The grapes are harvested and the wines made, developed and aged in the following municipalities:

—	Department of Aude: Azille;

—	Department of Hérault: Azillanet, Cesseras, Félines-Minervois, La Livinière, Siran.

7.   Main wine grape variety(-ies)

Carignan N

Cinsaut N - Cinsault

Grenache N

Lledoner pelut N

Mourvèdre N - Monastrell

Piquepoul noir N

Rivairenc N - Aspiran noir

Syrah N - Shiraz

Terret noir N

8.   Description of the link(s)

Description of the geographical area

The geographical area lies in the heart of the geographical area of the registered designation of origin ‘Minervois’, in the Petit Causse region, nestled against the foothills of the Montagne Noire mountain range, the most southerly part of the Cévennes region. The geographical area covers the territory of five municipalities in the Department of Hérault and one municipality in the Department of Aude, which are located in the South of France.

In this landscape of bright, open views and rugged terrain, vines alternate with hills covered in scrubland, pine, juniper and oak trees, interspersed with thalwegs or larger depressions.

The vineyards face south/south-east, at an altitude of between 120 m and 330 m.

The geographical area is bounded to the west by the River Ognon, a tributary of the Aude, and to the east by the Serre d’Oupia massif and the River Espène.

The geographical area belongs to a syncline filled with tertiary molassic sediment, cut by sandstone banks in the centre, conglomerates of lacustrine limestone to the north, and stony terraces scattered to the south.

The climate is characterised by low annual rainfall of between 400 mm and 500 mm and an annual temperature above 14 °C, with more than 2 400 hours of sunshine per year.

The Petit Causse region is shielded from rain coming in from the west by the Laure Minervois hills, which form a natural barrier, while the massif of the Serre d’Oupia blocks maritime air arriving from the Mediterranean. A hot, dry region that experiences a significant water deficit in summer, it benefits nonetheless from cool nocturnal airflows that descend from the ridges of the Causse.

Information on the product and the human factors relevant to the link

Vines have been present in the Minervois since Roman times.

Wine-growing became established in the region after the Roman province of Gallia Narbonensis (Narbonne) was founded in 118 BC, thanks to its excellent trade links, including a Roman road linking Toulouse and Lodève, to the north of the Via Domitia.

Many veterans of the Roman legion were granted land here, where they established wine estates (villae). The wines they produced were exported successfully throughout the empire. In the year 92 AD, Emperor Domitian prohibited the planting of new vineyards, to prevent competition.

The names of three municipalities testify to the wine-growing traditions of this era: La Livinière for ‘Cella Vinaria’ (wine cellar), Siran for ‘Villa de Sirius’, which takes its name from the first Roman legionnaire to settle in the region, and Félines for ‘Figulina’, a pottery (especially amphora) studio.

The wine-growing tradition of the region became inextricably bound up with the history of the Languedoc and the great invasions of the 3rd to the 6th centuries. These were followed by the Saracen conquests, which would hamper the expansion of wine-growing between the 7th and 9th centuries. Wine-growing resumed under the impetus of Benedictine abbeys such as those of Agnan de Caunes or the Saint-Jean Abbey.

The opening of the Canal du Midi in 1680, improvements in the road network and the creation of the railways in the 19th century helped to develop wine-growing as a monoculture. This prosperity was subject to the vagaries of the phylloxera epidemic and to overproduction, which reached a high point with the wine-making crisis of 1907. The crisis incited a revolt by the wine-makers of the South of France, but also prompted them to organise, chiefly by developing a cooperative system.

A wine-makers defence association was formed in the Minervois region in 1922. Initially recognised as a wine with the designation of origin ‘Delimited wine of superior quality’ in 1951, ‘Minervois’ was recognised as a registered designation of origin by decree of 15 February 1985, after varietal conversion and the imposition of more precise production conditions.

The wine-makers of La Livinière were always convinced, however, that their land and know-how would leave a mark on the originality of their red wine production. At the dawn of the 1970s, with the help of technical structures and under the impetus of the wine cooperative of the municipality of La Livinière led by Maurice Piccinini, wine-makers sought to ensure the best match between variety and planting site, optimising vine-pruning and training techniques, harvesting at optimum ripeness, and making improvements to wine-making techniques. Maurice Piccinini set up a defence association in 1988. The registered designation of origin ‘Minervois-La Livinière’ was recognised in 1999.

In 2018, 11 000 hl were produced by 45 producers, including 2 wine cooperatives, which produced 20 % of the volume.

The wines are produced by blending several varieties, in keeping with the tradition of the vineyards of the Languedoc, with most of the blend accounted for by the Grenache N, Mourvèdre N and Syrah N varieties.

Causal interactions

Shielded from maritime influences from the east and west, and with its south/south-east exposure, the geographical area enjoys a warm, dry climate. Nestled against the Montagne Noire mountain range, and with the effect of the altitudinal gradient, the area nonetheless enjoys cool night-time temperatures.

These specific conditions help the grapes to achieve optimal ripeness, a certain acidity, and a balance between alcohol and tannins.

The parcels on which the grapes are to be harvested are clearly demarcated. Preference is given to well-exposed, clay-limestone soils with a high stone content, which provide low natural yields. These conditions allow producers to match variety with location, which helps give these wines their particularly concentrated and powerful character.

The Grenache N variety provides warmth and roundness on the palate and favours stony terraces and marl. Syrah N is an early-budding variety that provides sweetness and fruity aromas. Cinsaut N and Carignan N are historical varieties. The former provides finesse, the latter, body and tannins. The Mourvèdre N variety provides delicate tannins and hints of spice.

Over the generations, producers have successfully adapted their wine-making techniques to extract the best from their grapes. Early on, a period of post-fermentation ageing in the tank was introduced, to produce a wine with complex aromas, and above all to ensure that the tannins become round and smooth. To achieve these goals, a minimum ageing period up to 15 October of the year following the harvest year was laid down in the specification.

Wine-making has punctuated the history of the geographical area over the past 2 000 years. References to the Roman Empire abound throughout the region, whether through place names or architecture. The area is host to numerous monuments and vestiges, such as the Church of Centeilles in the municipality of Siran, built on the site of a Roman villa, whose ancient columns are still visible.

Most of the estates were established on the ‘villae’ of former legionnaires, and the vineyards are still adorned with dry-stone huts typical of the region, known as ‘capitelles’, that are often centuries-old.

The producers of this region have managed to take an evocative name of a place steeped in history and turn it into a modern and recognised registered designation of origin.

The registered designation of origin ‘Minervois-La Livinière’ is one of the flagship wines of the Languedoc region.

Sealing the reputation and nobleness of this registered designation of origin, the ‘Livinage’, created at the start of the 1990s, has become an unmissable event at which professionals from the wine industry and journalists gather to sample wines, meet producers and discover the area’s rich diversity.

9.   Essential further conditions (packaging, labelling, other requirements)

Legal framework:

National legislation

Type of further condition:

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition:

—

The wines for which the registered designation ‘Minervois-La Livinière’ is claimed under the terms of this specification and which are presented using that designation cannot be declared after harvest, offered to the public, dispatched, marketed or sold unless the designation, accompanied by the words ‘Appellation contrôlée’ [Registered Designation], appear in the harvest declaration, in advertisements, catalogues, and on any labels, invoices or containers, in clearly visible characters.

—	The size of the letters of optional words whose use, under EU rules, may be regulated by the Member States, must not be larger in terms of height, width or depth than double the size of the letters forming the name of the registered designation of origin.

—	Wines bearing the registered designation of origin may specify on their label the broader geographical unit ‘Languedoc’.

—	The size of the letters for this broader geographical unit must not be larger in terms of height or width than half the size of the letters forming the name of the registered designation of origin.

Legal framework:

National legislation

Type of further condition:

Derogation concerning production in the demarcated geographical area

Description of the condition:

The area in immediate proximity, defined by derogation for the production, processing and ageing of the wines, comprises all or part of the territory of the following municipalities of the Department of Aude:

—

Pépieux;

—	Peyriac-Minervois: the locality of Les Tuileries d’Affiac.

Link to the product specification

https://info.agriculture.gouv.fr/gedei/site/bo-agri/document_administratif-b203f5e5-0950-4f4c-8407-65615a1d0791

---

(1)  OJ L 9, 11.1.2019, p. 2.