News
News headlines
- National “zero levels” of vitamins and minerals accepted, EU CourtMay 5, 2010
- Extended transition period for Article 13(1)(a) health claimsFebruary 1, 2010
- New sources of Vitamins and Minerals in the EUDecember 8, 2009
- Spain adopts new Recommended Daily Allowances for Vitamins and MineralsDecember 1, 2009
- Spain adopts new food supplements rulesNovember 11, 2009
- Olives are a “natural source of Vitamin E”, Autocontrol rulesNovember 11, 2009
- “Extra” jams can contain additives, ECJ rulesNovember 11, 2009
- Zero is not Light, Autocontrol rulesNovember 11, 2009
- “No! Sugar no!” is derogatory, Autocontrol rulesNovember 11, 2009
National “zero levels” of vitamins and minerals accepted, EU Court
May 5, 2010
Whilst the powers and limits of the Member States in terms of protection of public health had already been established by the Court, the new ruling allows them to prohibit the use of vitamins and minerals even when they have been authorized at EU level pursuant to Directive 2002/46.
This possibility only arises so long as the Commission has not adopted minimum and maximum amounts of vitamins and minerals for food supplements, due since 2002. In addition, the following conditions have to be complied with:
(i) it is impossible to calculate precisely the intake of that vitamin or mineral from other dietary sources in order to set its maximum amount; and
(ii) there is a genuine risk (not purely hypothetical considerations) that that intake of that vitamin or mineral will exceed the upper safe limit established for the vitamin or mineral in question.
The Court went even further by stating that, even when the upper safe limits for vitamins and minerals have been established, Member States could set maximum amounts at a level significantly lower than those limits, provided that the criteria in Article 5(1) and (2) of Directive 2002/46 are respected and that they comply with the principle of proportionality.
Comment
The ruling in Case C-466/08 may bring about a proliferation of national derogations similar to the French prohibition of the use of fluoride in food supplements. For instance, in Belgium, boron and fluoride remain outside the authorized list of substances.
This is likely to trigger the fragmentation of the internal market for food supplements, already weakened by the absence of harmonized maximum limits, positive lists of other substances, and overages, frustrating the objectives of Directive 2002/46. The risk of fragmentation will, in turn, put pressure on the European Commission to adopt long overdue EU-wide maximum limits.
The full text of the judgment is available here.
For further information, please contact Liesbeth Timmermans (ltimmermans@foodlawconsultants.com) or Leticia Pérez (lperez@foodlawconsultants.com).
