- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-524/18: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 30 January 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Dr. Willmar Schwabe GmbH & Co. KG v Queisser Pharma GmbH & Co. KG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Public health — Information and consumer protection — Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 — Implementing Decision 2013/63/EU — Nutritional and health claims made on foods — Article 10(3) — Reference to general, non-specific benefits — Concept of ‘accompanying’ a specific health claim — Obligation to produce scientific evidence — Scope)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018CA0524
62018CA0524
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
27.4.2020
Official Journal of the European Union
C 137/15
(Case C-524/18) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Public health - Information and consumer protection - Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 - Implementing Decision 2013/63/EU - Nutritional and health claims made on foods - Article 10(3) - Reference to general, non-specific benefits - Concept of ‘accompanying’ a specific health claim - Obligation to produce scientific evidence - Scope)
(2020/C 137/19)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Dr. Willmar Schwabe GmbH & Co. KG
Defendant: Queisser Pharma GmbH & Co. KG
Operative part of the judgment
1.Article 10(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 107/2008 of 15 January 2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council, must be interpreted as meaning that the requirement which it lays down that any reference to general, non-specific benefits of the nutrient or food must be accompanied by a specific health claim included in the lists provided for in Articles 13 or 14 of that regulation, is not satisfied where the packaging of a food supplement contains a reference to general, non-specific health benefits of a nutrient or food on the front of the packaging, whereas the specific health claim intended to accompany it appears only on the back of that packaging and there is no clear reference, such as an asterisk, between the two;
2.Article 10(3) of Regulation No 1924/2006 as amended by Regulation No 107/2008 must be interpreted as meaning that references to general, non-specific benefits of a nutrient or food for overall good health or health-related well-being must be justified by scientific evidence within the meaning of Articles 5(1)(a) and 6(1) of that regulation. To that end, it suffices for such references to be accompanied by specific health claims included in the lists provided for in Article 13 or Article 14 of that regulation.
Language of the case: German.
OJ C 392, 29.10.2018.