Not necessarily to expressly state that a risk factor for food is ‘significantly’ reduced

18-09-2013 Print this page
IPPT20130718, CJEU, Green Swan

ADVERTISING LAW

 

Health can also be disease risk claim without claim that risk factor is ‘significantly’ reduced.

 

"26. Therefore, the answer to the first question is that Article 2(2)(6) of Regulation No 1924/2006 must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to be considered a ‘reduction of disease risk claim’ within the meaning of that provision, a health claim need not necessarily expressly state that the consumption of a category of food, a food or one of its constituents ‘significantly’ reduces a risk factor in the development of a human disease."

 

Commercial communication may constitute a trade mark or brand name provided that it complies with requirements in applicable legislation.

 

"32. Consequently, the answer to the second question is that Article 28(2) of Regulation No 1924/2006 must be interpreted as meaning that a commercial communication appearing on the packaging of a food may constitute a trade mark or brand name, within the meaning of that provision, provided that it is protected, as a mark or as a name, by the applicable legislation. It is for the national court to ascertain, having regard to all the legal and factual considerations of the case before it, whether that communication is indeed a trade mark or brand name thus protected.

 

37. Having regard to the preceding, the answer to the third question is that Article 28(2) of Regulation No 1924/2006 must be interpreted as referring only to foods bearing a trade mark or brand name which must be considered a nutrition or health claim within the meaning of that regulation and which, in that form, existed before 1 January 2005."

 

IPPT20130718, CJEU, Green Swan

 

C-299/12 - ECLI:EU:C:2013:501