{"id":224432,"date":"2019-11-12T16:43:29","date_gmt":"2019-11-12T21:43:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/?post_type=document&p=224432"},"modified":"2020-07-22T00:41:38","modified_gmt":"2020-07-22T04:41:38","slug":"court-of-justice-of-eu-judgement-on-labeling-of-foodstuffs-from-settlements-non-un-document","status":"publish","type":"document","link":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/document\/court-of-justice-of-eu-judgement-on-labeling-of-foodstuffs-from-settlements-non-un-document\/","title":{"rendered":"Court of Justice of EU Judgement on Labeling of Foodstuffs from Settlements – Non UN document"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is a non-Â鶹APP document. The Â鶹APP provides these documents only as a convenience for reference purposes, and the inclusion of a document does not imply the endorsement of its content by the Â鶹APP.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Espa\u00f1ol\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

Fran\u00e7ais<\/a><\/p>\n

Provisional text<\/p>\n

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber)<\/p>\n

12\u00a0November 2019\u00a0(*<\/a>)<\/p>\n

(Reference for a preliminary ruling\u00a0\u2014 Regulation (EU) No\u00a01169\/2011\u00a0\u2014 Provision of food information to consumers\u00a0\u2014 Mandatory indication of the country of origin or place of provenance of a foodstuff where failure to indicate this might mislead the consumer\u00a0\u2014 Requirement that foodstuffs originating in territories occupied by the State of Israel bear the indication of their territory of origin, accompanied, where those foodstuffs come from an Israeli settlement within that territory, by the indication of that provenance)<\/p>\n

In Case C\u2011363\/18,<\/p>\n

REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article\u00a0267 TFEU from the Conseil d\u2019\u00c9tat (Council of State, France), made by decision of 30\u00a0May 2018, received at the Court on 4\u00a0June 2018, in the proceedings<\/p>\n

Organisation juive europ\u00e9enne,<\/b><\/p>\n

Vignoble Psagot Ltd<\/b><\/p>\n

v<\/p>\n

Ministre de l\u2019\u00c9conomie et des Finances,<\/b><\/p>\n

THE COURT (Grand Chamber),<\/p>\n

composed of K.\u00a0Lenaerts, President, R.\u00a0Silva de Lapuerta, Vice-President, J.\u2011C.\u00a0Bonichot, M.\u00a0Vilaras, E.\u00a0Regan, P.G.\u00a0Xuereb and L.S.\u00a0Rossi, Presidents of Chambers, E.\u00a0Juh\u00e1sz, M.\u00a0Ile\u0161i\u010d, J.\u00a0Malenovsk\u00fd (Rapporteur), D.\u00a0\u0160v\u00e1by, C.\u00a0Lycourgos and N.\u00a0Pi\u00e7arra, Judges,<\/p>\n

Advocate General: G.\u00a0Hogan,<\/p>\n

Registrar: V.\u00a0Giacobbo\u2011Peyronnel, Administrator,<\/p>\n

having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 9\u00a0April 2019,<\/p>\n

after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:<\/p>\n

\u2013\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Organisation juive europ\u00e9enne, by J.\u00a0Buk Lament, avocate,<\/p>\n

\u2013\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Vignoble Psagot Ltd, by F.\u2011H.\u00a0Briard, Y.\u2011A.\u00a0Benizri and E.\u00a0Weiss, avocats,<\/p>\n

\u2013\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0the French Government, by D.\u00a0Colas, B.\u00a0Fodda, S.\u00a0Horrenberger, L.\u00a0Legrand, A.\u2011L.\u00a0Desjonqu\u00e8res, C.\u00a0Mosser and E.\u00a0de Moustier, acting as Agents,<\/p>\n

\u2013\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Ireland, by M.\u00a0Browne, G.\u00a0Hodge and A.\u00a0Joyce, acting as Agents, and by S.\u00a0Kingston, Barrister-at-law,<\/p>\n

\u2013\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0the Netherlands Government, by M.K.\u00a0Bulterman and P.\u00a0Huurnink, acting as Agents,<\/p>\n

\u2013\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0the Swedish Government, by A.\u00a0Falk, C.\u00a0Meyer\u2011Seitz and H.\u00a0Shev, acting as Agents,<\/p>\n

\u2013\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0the European Commission, by A.\u00a0Bouquet, B.\u00a0De Meester, F.\u00a0Clotuche\u2011Duvieusart and K.\u00a0Herbout\u2011Borczak, acting as Agents,<\/p>\n

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 13\u00a0June 2019,<\/p>\n

gives the following<\/p>\n

Judgment<\/b><\/p>\n

<\/a>1\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Regulation (EU) No\u00a01169\/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25\u00a0October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No\u00a01924\/2006 and (EC) No\u00a01925\/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87\/250\/EEC, Council Directive 90\/496\/EEC, Commission Directive 1999\/10\/EC, Directive 2000\/13\/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002\/67\/EC and 2008\/5\/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No\u00a0608\/2004 (OJ 2011 L\u00a0304, p.\u00a018).<\/p>\n

<\/a>2\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The request has been made in proceedings between, on the one hand, Organisation juive europ\u00e9enne and Vignoble Psagot Ltd and, on the other hand, the ministre de l\u2019\u00c9conomie et des Finances (the French Minister for the Economy and Finance) in relation to the legality of a notice concerning the indication of origin of goods originating in the territories occupied by the State of Israel since June 1967.<\/p>\n

\u00a0Legal context<\/b><\/p>\n

\u00a0European Union law<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n

\u00a0Legislation concerning foodstuffs<\/i><\/p>\n

<\/a>3\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Recitals\u00a03, 4 and 29 of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011 state:<\/p>\n

\u2018(3)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In order to achieve a high level of health protection for consumers and to guarantee their right to information, it should be ensured that consumers are appropriately informed as regards the food they consume. Consumers\u2019 choices can be influenced by, inter alia, health, economic, environmental, social and ethical considerations.<\/p>\n

(4)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0According to Regulation (EC) No\u00a0178\/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28\u00a0January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety [OJ 2002 L\u00a031, p.\u00a01] it is a general principle of food law to provide a basis for consumers to make informed choices in relation to food they consume and to prevent any practices that may mislead the consumer.<\/p>\n

\u2026<\/p>\n

(29)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The indication of the country of origin or of the place of provenance of a food should be provided whenever its absence is likely to mislead consumers as to the true country of origin or place of provenance of that product. In all cases, the indication of country of origin or place of provenance should be provided in a manner which does not deceive the consumer\u00a0\u2026\u2019<\/p>\n

<\/a>4\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Article\u00a01 of that regulation, entitled \u2018Subject matter and scope\u2019 provides, in paragraph\u00a01:<\/p>\n

\u2018This Regulation provides the basis for the assurance of a high level of consumer protection in relation to food information, taking into account the differences in the perception of consumers and their information needs whilst ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market.\u2019<\/p>\n

<\/a>5\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Article\u00a02(2)(g) of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011 provides that, for the purposes of that regulation, the \u2018place of provenance\u2019 means any place where a food is indicated to come from, and that is not the \u2018country of origin\u2019 as determined in accordance with Articles\u00a023 to 26 of Regulation (EEC) No\u00a02913\/92 of 12\u00a0October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L\u00a0302, p.\u00a01; \u2018the Community Customs Code\u2019), before specifying that the name, business name or address of the food business operator on the label shall not constitute an indication of the country of origin or place of provenance of food. In addition, paragraph\u00a03 of that article provides that the \u2018country of origin\u2019 of a food shall refer to the origin of a food as determined in accordance with Articles\u00a023 to 26 of the Community Customs Code.<\/p>\n

<\/a>6\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Article\u00a03 of that regulation, entitled \u2018General objectives\u2019, provides, in paragraph\u00a01:<\/p>\n

\u2018The provision of food information shall pursue a high level of protection of consumers\u2019 health and interests by providing a basis for final consumers to make informed choices and to make safe use of food, with particular regard to health, economic, environmental, social and ethical considerations.\u2019<\/p>\n

<\/a>7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Under Article\u00a09 of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011, entitled \u2018List of mandatory particulars\u2019:<\/p>\n

\u20181.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In accordance with Articles\u00a010 to 35 and subject to the exceptions contained in this Chapter, indication of the following particulars shall be mandatory:<\/p>\n

\u2026<\/p>\n

(i)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0the country of origin or place of provenance where provided for in Article\u00a026;<\/p>\n

\u2026\u2019<\/p>\n

<\/a>8\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Article\u00a026 of that regulation, entitled \u2018Country of origin or place of provenance\u2019, provides, in paragraph\u00a02:<\/p>\n

\u2018Indication of the country of origin or place of provenance shall be mandatory:<\/p>\n

(a)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0where failure to indicate this might mislead the consumer as to the true country of origin or place of provenance of the food, in particular if the information accompanying the food or the label as a whole would otherwise imply that the food has a different country of origin or place of provenance;<\/p>\n

\u2026\u2019<\/p>\n

\u00a0Customs legislation<\/i><\/p>\n

<\/a>9\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The Community Customs Code was repealed by Regulation (EU) No\u00a0952\/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9\u00a0October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ 2013 L\u00a0269, p.\u00a01 and corrigendum OJ 2013 L\u00a0287, p.\u00a090; \u2018the Union Customs Code\u2019), the relevant provisions of which have been applicable since 1\u00a0May 2016, in accordance with Article\u00a0288(2) thereof.<\/p>\n

<\/a>10\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Since that date, references to the Community Customs Code in other Union acts, such as Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011, must be construed as references to the corresponding provisions of the Union Customs Code, as is clear from Article\u00a0286(3) of the latter.<\/p>\n

<\/a>11\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Article\u00a060 of the Union Customs Code, which corresponds to Articles\u00a023(1) and 24 of the Community Customs Code, provides:<\/p>\n

\u20181.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Goods wholly obtained in a single country or territory shall be regarded as having their origin in that country or territory.<\/p>\n

2.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Goods the production of which involves more than one country or territory shall be deemed to originate in the country or territory where they underwent their last, substantial, economically-justified processing or working, in an undertaking equipped for that purpose, resulting in the manufacture of a new product or representing an important stage of manufacture.\u2019<\/p>\n

\u00a0The Commission Notice<\/i><\/p>\n

<\/a>12\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0On 12\u00a0November 2015, the European Commission published, in the\u00a0Official Journal of the European Union<\/i>, a notice entitled \u2018Interpretative Notice on indication of origin of goods from the territories occupied by [the State of] Israel since June 1967\u2019 (OJ 2015 C\u00a0375, p.\u00a04; \u2018the Commission Notice\u2019).<\/p>\n

<\/a>13\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In paragraph\u00a01 of that notice, the Commission states that \u2018the European Union, in line with international law, does not recognise Israel\u2019s sovereignty over the territories occupied by Israel since June 1967, namely the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and does not consider them to be part of Israel\u2019s territory\u2019.<\/p>\n

<\/a>14\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In paragraph\u00a02 of that notice, the Commission states that there is \u2018a demand for clarity from consumers, economic operators and national authorities about existing Union legislation on origin information of products from Israeli-occupied territories\u2019 and that \u2018the aim is also to ensure the respect of Union positions and commitments in conformity with international law on the non-recognition by the Union of Israel\u2019s sovereignty over the territories occupied by Israel since June 1967\u2019.<\/p>\n

<\/a>15\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In paragraph\u00a03 of that notice, the Commission states that \u2018this Notice does not create any new legislative rules\u2019 and \u2018reflects the Commission\u2019s understanding of the relevant Union legislation\u2019, \u2018without prejudice to\u00a0\u2026 the interpretation which the Court of Justice may provide\u2019.<\/p>\n

<\/a>16\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0After referring, in paragraphs\u00a04 to 6 of its notice, to several provisions of EU legislation which require that the origin of various types of products be indicated on those products, the Commission states the following in paragraphs\u00a07 to 10 of that notice:<\/p>\n

\u2018(7)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Since the Golan Heights and the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) are not part of the Israeli territory according to international law, the indication \u201cproduct from Israel\u201d is considered to be incorrect and misleading in the sense of the referenced legislation.<\/p>\n

(8)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0To the extent that the indication of the origin is mandatory, another expression will have to be used, which takes into account how these territories are often known.<\/p>\n

(9)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0For products from Palestine that do not originate from settlements, an indication which does not mislead about the geographical origin, while corresponding to international practice, could be \u201cproduct from the West Bank (Palestinian product)\u201d, \u201cproduct from Gaza\u201d or \u201cproduct from Palestine\u201d.<\/p>\n

(10)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0For products from the West Bank or the Golan Heights that originate from settlements, an indication limited to \u201cproduct from the Golan Heights\u201d or \u201cproduct from the West Bank\u201d would not be acceptable. Even if they would designate the wider area or territory from which the product originates, the omission of the additional geographical information that the product comes from Israeli settlements would mislead the consumer as to the true origin of the product. In such cases the expression \u201cIsraeli settlement\u201d or equivalent needs to be added, in brackets, for example. Therefore, expressions such as \u201cproduct from the Golan Heights (Israeli settlement)\u201d or \u201cproduct from the West Bank (Israeli settlement)\u201d could be used.\u2019<\/p>\n

\u00a0French\u00a0<\/b>law<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n

<\/a>17\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The notice to economic operators concerning the indication of origin of goods originating in the territories occupied by the State of Israel since June 1967 (\u2018Avis aux op\u00e9rateurs \u00e9conomiques relatifs \u00e0 l\u2019indication de l\u2019origine des marchandises issues des territoires occup\u00e9s par [l\u2019\u00c9tat d\u2019]Isra\u00ebl depuis juin 1967\u2019), published by the French Minister for the Economy and Finance on 24\u00a0November 2016 (JORF 2016, No\u00a0273, text No\u00a081; \u2018the Ministerial Notice\u2019), reads as follows:<\/p>\n

\u2018Regulation [No\u00a01169\/2011] provides that the labelling particulars must be fair. They must not risk misleading the consumer, particularly as to origin of the products. Foodstuffs from the territories occupied by Israel must therefore be labelled to reflect this origin.<\/p>\n

Consequently, the [Direction g\u00e9n\u00e9rale de la Concurrence, de la consommation et de la r\u00e9pression des fraudes (Directorate-General for Competition, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control) (DGCCRF) of the French Ministry of the Economy and Finance] draws the attention of operators to [the Commission Notice].<\/p>\n

In particular, it specifies that under international law the Golan Heights and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, are not part of Israel. Consequently, in order not to mislead the consumer, the labelling of food products must accurately indicate the exact origin of the products, whether their indication is mandatory under Community rules or voluntarily affixed by the operator.<\/p>\n

For products from the West Bank or the Golan Heights which originate in settlements, an indication limited to \u201cproduct originating in the Golan Heights\u201d or \u201cproduct originating in the West Bank\u201d is not acceptable. Although these terms do refer to the wider area or territory in which the product originates, the omission of the additional geographical information that the product originates from Israeli settlements is likely to mislead the consumer as to the true origin of the product. In such cases, it is necessary to add, in brackets, the term \u201cIsraeli settlement\u201d or equivalent terms. Thus, terms such as \u201cproduct originating in the Golan Heights (Israeli settlement)\u201d or \u201cproduct originating in the West Bank (Israeli settlement)\u201d may be used.\u2019<\/p>\n

\u00a0The disputes in the main proceedings and the questions referred for a preliminary ruling<\/b><\/p>\n

<\/a>18\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0By two applications lodged on 24 and 25\u00a0January 2017, Organisation juive europ\u00e9enne and Vignoble Psagot each brought an action before the Conseil d\u2019\u00c9tat (Council of State, France) seeking the annulment of the Ministerial Notice. In support of their respective claims, they both relied on various pleas in law alleging, inter alia, that that notice did not take into account Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011.<\/p>\n

<\/a>19\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The Conseil d\u2019\u00c9tat (Council of State) considered, in essence, that the questions raised by the examination of the pleas alleging that the Ministerial Notice disregarded Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011 were decisive for the outcome of the two disputes pending before it and that they raised serious difficulties.<\/p>\n

<\/a>20\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In those circumstances, the Conseil d\u2019\u00c9tat (Council of State) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:<\/p>\n

\u2018(1)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Does EU law and in particular Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011, where indication of the origin of a product falling within the scope of that regulation is mandatory, require, for a product from a territory occupied by the State of Israel since 1967, an indication of that territory and an indication that the product comes from an Israeli settlement if that is the case?<\/p>\n

(2)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0If not, do the provisions of the regulation, in particular those in Chapter\u00a0VI thereof, allow a Member State to require those indications?\u2019<\/p>\n

\u00a0Consideration of the questions referred<\/b><\/p>\n

\u00a0The first question<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n

<\/a>21\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0By its first question, the national court asks, in essence, whether Article\u00a09(1)(i) of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011, read in conjunction with Article\u00a026(2)(a) of that regulation, must be interpreted as meaning that foodstuffs originating in a territory occupied by the State of Israel must bear not only the indication of that territory but also, where those foodstuffs come from an Israeli settlement within that territory, the indication of that provenance.<\/p>\n

<\/a>22\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In that respect, it should be noted, first, that it follows from Article\u00a09(1)(i) of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011 that the indication of the country of origin or the place of provenance of a food is mandatory where provided for in Article\u00a026 of that regulation.<\/p>\n

<\/a>23\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Article\u00a026(2)(a) provides that that indication is mandatory where failure to indicate this might mislead the consumer as to the true country of origin or place of provenance of a food, in particular if the information accompanying the food or the label as a whole would otherwise imply that the food has a different country of origin or place of provenance.<\/p>\n

<\/a>24\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In addition, recital\u00a029 of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011, in the light of which that provision must be read, states that, in all cases, an indication of origin or provenance should not deceive consumers.<\/p>\n

<\/a>25\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0It follows that the country of origin or the place of provenance of a foodstuff must be indicated where failure to indicate this might mislead consumers into believing that that foodstuff has a country of origin or a place of provenance different from its true country of origin or place of provenance. Furthermore, where the origin or provenance is indicated on that foodstuff, it must not be deceptive.<\/p>\n

<\/a>26\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Secondly, the concept of \u2018country of origin\u2019 in Article\u00a026(2)(a) of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011 is defined in Article\u00a02(3) of that regulation by reference to the Community Customs Code, which was succeeded by the Union Customs Code, as indicated in paragraph\u00a09 above.<\/p>\n

<\/a>27\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Under Article\u00a060 of the Union Customs Code, goods which have either been wholly obtained in a particular \u2018country\u2019 or \u2018territory\u2019 or have undergone their last substantial processing or working in that country or territory are to be regarded as having their origin in that country or territory.<\/p>\n

<\/a>28\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0As regards the term \u2018country\u2019, it should be noted that it is used numerous times in the TEU and the TFEU as a synonym for the term \u2018State\u2019. Therefore, in order to ensure the consistent interpretation of EU law, the same meaning should be given to that term in the Union Customs Code and in Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011.<\/p>\n

<\/a>29\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In addition, the notion of \u2018State\u2019 must itself be understood as referring to a sovereign entity exercising, within its geographical boundaries, the full range of powers recognised by international law (see, to that effect, judgment of 21\u00a0December 2016,\u00a0Council<\/i>\u00a0v\u00a0Front Polisario<\/i>, C\u2011104\/16\u00a0P, EU:C:2016:973, paragraph\u00a095).<\/p>\n

<\/a>30\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0As regards the term \u2018territory\u2019, it follows from the alternative nature of the wording in Article\u00a060 of the Union Customs Code that that term refers to entities other than \u2018countries\u2019 and, therefore, other than \u2018States\u2019.<\/p>\n

<\/a>31\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0As the Court has already held, such entities include, inter alia, geographic spaces which, whilst being under the jurisdiction or the international responsibility of a State, nevertheless have a separate and distinct status from that State under international law (see, to that effect, judgments of 21\u00a0December 2016,\u00a0Council<\/i>\u00a0v\u00a0Front Polisario<\/i>, C\u2011104\/16\u00a0P, EU:C:2016:973, paragraphs\u00a092 and 95, and of 27\u00a0February 2018,\u00a0Western Sahara Campaign UK<\/i>, C\u2011266\/16, EU:C:2018:118, paragraphs\u00a062 to 64).<\/p>\n

<\/a>32\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In the light of the content of Article\u00a060 of the Union Customs Code, the obligation laid down in Article\u00a026(2) of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011 to indicate the country of origin of a foodstuff, where failure to indicate this might mislead the consumer, thus applies not only to foodstuffs originating in \u2018countries\u2019, as described in paragraphs\u00a028 and 29 above, but also to those originating in \u2018territories\u2019, as referred to in paragraph\u00a031 above.<\/p>\n

<\/a>33\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In the present case, the referring court states that the foodstuffs at issue in the main proceedings originate in \u2018territories occupied by the State of Israel since 1967\u2019 and, more specifically, as stated in the Ministerial Notice, in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights.<\/p>\n

<\/a>34\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Under the rules of international humanitarian law, these territories are subject to a limited jurisdiction of the State of Israel, as an occupying power, while each has its own international status distinct from that of that State.<\/p>\n

<\/a>35\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The West Bank is a territory whose people, namely the Palestinian people, enjoy the right to self-determination, as noted by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion of 9\u00a0July 2004, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (ICJ Reports 2004, p.\u00a0136, paragraphs\u00a0118 and 149). The Golan Heights form part of the territory of a State other than the State of Israel, namely the Syrian Arab Republic.<\/p>\n

<\/a>36\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In the light of the foregoing, it must be held that displaying, on foodstuffs such as those at issue in the main proceedings, the indication that the State of Israel is their \u2018country of origin\u2019, when those foodstuffs actually originate in one of the territories referred to in paragraph\u00a033 above, would be liable to deceive consumers.<\/p>\n

<\/a>37\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In addition, in order to prevent consumers being misled as to the fact that the State of Israel is present in those territories as an occupying power and not as a sovereign entity within the meaning of paragraph\u00a029 above, it appears necessary to inform them that those foodstuffs do not originate in that State.<\/p>\n

<\/a>38\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Consequently, the indication of the territory of origin of foodstuffs such as those at issue in the main proceedings cannot be omitted and must therefore be regarded as mandatory under Articles\u00a09 and 26 of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011.<\/p>\n

<\/a>39\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Thirdly and lastly, the concept of \u2018place of provenance\u2019 in Article\u00a026(2)(a) of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011 refers\u00a0\u2014 according to the first sentence of Article\u00a02(2)(g) of that regulation\u00a0\u2014 to the place from which a food comes, but which is not the \u2018country of origin\u2019 of that food. The latter provision specifies, however, that the indication of the name, business name or address of the producer cannot act as an indication of the provenance of that foodstuff.<\/p>\n

<\/a>40\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Moreover, in view of the considerations in paragraphs\u00a026 to 32 above, a place of provenance likewise cannot correspond to the \u2018territory of origin\u2019 of a foodstuff.<\/p>\n

<\/a>41\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In view of these elements, the concept of \u2018place of provenance\u2019 must be understood as referring to any specific geographical area within the country or territory of origin of a foodstuff, with the exception of a producer\u2019s address.<\/p>\n

<\/a>42\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In the present case, the question raised by the national court involves, first, determining whether Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011 must be interpreted as meaning that the indication that a foodstuff comes from an \u2018Israeli settlement\u2019 located in one of the territories referred to in paragraph\u00a033 above may be regarded as an indication of the place of provenance within the meaning of that regulation.<\/p>\n

<\/a>43\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The term \u2018settlement\u2019, because of its generic nature, is likely to refer not to a single place, but to a number of localities. Moreover, that term, in its usual sense, has a demographic dimension beyond its geographical meaning, since it refers to a population of foreign origin.<\/p>\n

<\/a>44\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0However, these factors do not prevent the term \u2018settlement\u2019 from contributing to the designation of a \u2018place of provenance\u2019 within the meaning of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011, provided that, in a given case, it refers to a specific geographical area, as defined in paragraph\u00a041 above.<\/p>\n

<\/a>45\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0It follows, in the present case, that the indication that a foodstuff comes from an \u2018Israeli settlement\u2019 located in one of the territories referred to in paragraph\u00a033 above may be regarded as an indication of \u2018place of provenance\u2019 within the meaning of Article\u00a026(2)(a) of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011.<\/p>\n

<\/a>46\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In those circumstances, it must be determined, secondly, whether the indication \u2018Israeli settlement\u2019 is mandatory, in the case of foodstuffs such as those at issue in the main proceedings. More specifically, since, as follows from paragraph\u00a038 above, such foodstuffs must bear the indication of their territory of origin, the Court must determine whether they must also bear the indication \u2018Israeli settlement\u2019.<\/p>\n

<\/a>47\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0As stated in paragraph\u00a025 above, it is necessary, for that purpose, to verify whether the omission of that indication, with the result that only the territory of origin is mentioned, might mislead consumers as to the true place of provenance of the foodstuffs concerned.<\/p>\n

<\/a>48\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In that regard, it should be noted that the settlements established in some of the territories occupied by the State of Israel are characterised by the fact that they give concrete expression to a policy of population transfer conducted by that State outside its territory, in violation of the rules of general international humanitarian law, as codified in the sixth paragraph of Article\u00a049 of the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, signed in Geneva on 12\u00a0August 1949 (Â鶹APP Treaty Series<\/i>, vol.\u00a075, No\u00a0973, p.\u00a0287), as noted by the International Court of Justice, with respect to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, in its Advisory Opinion of 9\u00a0July 2004, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (ICJ Reports 2004, p.\u00a0136, paragraph\u00a0120). Moreover, that policy has been repeatedly condemned by the Â鶹APP Security Council, as the Advocate General noted in points\u00a053 and 54 of his Opinion, and by the European Union itself. In that context, it should be underlined that, in accordance with Article\u00a03(5) TEU, the European Union is to contribute to the strict observance of international law, including the principles of the Â鶹APP Charter.<\/p>\n

<\/a>49\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0It should be pointed out that, if a foodstuff from an Israeli settlement bore the indication of one of the territories referred to in paragraph\u00a033 above, without however mentioning that place of provenance, consumers could be led to believe that it comes, in the case of the West Bank, from a Palestinian producer or, in the case of the Golan Heights, from a Syrian producer.<\/p>\n

<\/a>50\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Consumers cannot be expected to guess, in the absence of any information capable of enlightening them in that respect, that that foodstuff comes from a locality or a set of localities constituting a settlement established in one of those territories in breach of the rules of international humanitarian law.<\/p>\n

<\/a>51\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0To that extent, the omission of the indication that a foodstuff comes from an \u2018Israeli settlement\u2019 located in one of the territories referred to in paragraph\u00a033 above is likely to mislead consumers, by suggesting that that food has a place of provenance other than its true place of provenance.<\/p>\n

<\/a>52\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0That conclusion is supported by the objective of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011, which is, as stated in Article\u00a01(1) thereof, to ensure a high level of consumer protection in relation to food information, taking into account the differences in perception of consumers.<\/p>\n

<\/a>53\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0It follows from Article\u00a03(1) of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011, and from recitals\u00a03 and 4 of that regulation, in the light of which that provision must be read, that the provision of information to consumers must enable them to make informed choices, with particular regard to health, economic, environmental, social and ethical considerations.<\/p>\n

<\/a>54\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0However, given the non-exhaustive nature of this list, it should be emphasised that other types of considerations, such as those relating to the observance of international law, may also be relevant in that context.<\/p>\n

<\/a>55\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In the present case, it must be acknowledged\u00a0\u2014 as the Advocate General noted, in essence, in points\u00a051 and 52 of his Opinion\u00a0\u2014 that consumers\u2019 purchasing decisions may be informed by considerations relating to the fact that the foodstuffs in question in the main proceedings come from settlements established in breach of the rules of international humanitarian law.<\/p>\n

<\/a>56\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In addition, the fact that a foodstuff comes from a settlement established in breach of the rules of international humanitarian law may be the subject of ethical assessments capable of influencing consumers\u2019 purchasing decisions, particularly since some of those rules constitute fundamental rules of international law (Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice of 9\u00a0July 2004, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, ICJ Reports 2004, p.\u00a0136, paragraphs\u00a0155 to 159).<\/p>\n

<\/a>57\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Thus, although Articles\u00a09(1)(i) and 26(2)(a) of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011 refer to the indication of the country of origin \u2018or\u2019 the place of provenance, those provisions require, in a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, both the indication that a foodstuff originates in one of the territories referred to in paragraph\u00a033 above and the indication that it comes from an \u2018Israeli settlement\u2019, where that foodstuff comes from a settlement within one of those territories, since the omission of that second indication is liable to mislead consumers as to the place of provenance of that foodstuff.<\/p>\n

<\/a>58\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the first question must be that Article\u00a09(1)(i) of Regulation No\u00a01169\/2011, read in conjunction with Article\u00a026(2)(a) of that regulation, must be interpreted as meaning that foodstuffs originating in a territory occupied by the State of Israel must bear not only the indication of that territory but also, where those foodstuffs come from a locality or a group of localities constituting an Israeli settlement within that territory, the indication of that provenance.<\/p>\n

\u00a0The second question<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n

<\/a>59\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In the light of the answer given to the first question, there is no need to answer the second question.<\/p>\n

\u00a0Costs<\/b><\/p>\n

<\/a>60\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable.<\/p>\n

On those grounds, the Court (Grand Chamber) hereby rules:<\/p>\n

Article\u00a09(1)(i) of Regulation (EU) No\u00a01169\/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25\u00a0October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No\u00a01924\/2006 and (EC) No\u00a01925\/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87\/250\/EEC, Council Directive 90\/496\/EEC, Commission Directive 1999\/10\/EC, Directive 2000\/13\/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002\/67\/EC and 2008\/5\/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No\u00a0608\/2004, read in conjunction with Article\u00a026(2)(a) of that regulation, must be interpreted as meaning that foodstuffs originating in a territory occupied by the State of Israel must bear not only the indication of that territory but also, where those foodstuffs come from a locality or a group of localities constituting an Israeli settlement within that territory, the indication of that provenance.<\/b><\/p>\n

[Signatures]<\/p>\n

\n

*<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Language of the case: French.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This is a non-Â鶹APP document. The Â鶹APP provides these documents only as a convenience for reference purposes, and the inclusion of a document does not imply the endorsement of its content by the Â鶹APP. Espa\u00f1ol\u00a0 Fran\u00e7ais Provisional text JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 12\u00a0November 2019\u00a0(*) (Reference for a preliminary ruling\u00a0\u2014 Regulation […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":172,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"template":"template-page.php","meta":{"footnotes":""},"country":[],"document-category":[2433,2737,6102,2769],"document-source":[2505],"committee-meeting":[],"document-subject":[1937,2185,2349,1805,2137],"entity":[1889],"document-language":[6542,6541,6538],"class_list":["post-224432","document","type-document","status-publish","hentry","document-category-french-text","document-category-law","document-category-legal-instrument","document-category-spanish-text","document-source-european-union-eu","document-subject-economic-issues","document-subject-legal-issues","document-subject-living-conditions","document-subject-occupation","document-subject-settlements","entity-intergovernmental-organization-or-multilateral","document-language-english","document-language-french","document-language-spanish"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/224432","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/document"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/172"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/224432\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=224432"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=224432"},{"taxonomy":"document-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-category?post=224432"},{"taxonomy":"document-source","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-source?post=224432"},{"taxonomy":"committee-meeting","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/committee-meeting?post=224432"},{"taxonomy":"document-subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-subject?post=224432"},{"taxonomy":"entity","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/entity?post=224432"},{"taxonomy":"document-language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-language?post=224432"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}