The High Court of England and Wales has reportedly held DJ Houghton Chicken Catching Services liable for claims brought by six Lithuanian men who allege they were victims of trafficking. The company lost its license after police raids in 2012 found what the Gangmasters Licensing Authority called “the worst UK gangmaster ever.” The men assert that during their employment catching chickens for the company, they were denied sleep and toilet breaks, charged illegal work-finding fees, abused and assaulted, denied minimum wages and provided dirty, overcrowded and unsafe living quarters. The owners of the company argued that a Lithuanian supervisor was at fault for the treatment, but the court reportedly found that the supervisor’s methods were integral to business operations, leaving the company liable for his actions. The attorney representing the Lithuanian men told The Guardian, “This is the first time a British company has been found liable for victims of…
Category Archives European Courts
France’s highest administrative court, the Conseil d’État, has reportedly invalidated a 2014 decree banning Monsanto’s MON810 maize, a genetically modified organism (GMO), because the decree did not demonstrate that the maize would cause serious health or environmental risks, a standard determined by EU rules. The ruling will not allow GMO maize to be cultivated in the country; in 2015, an EU directive allowed member nations to prohibit GMO crops, and France passed legislation complying with the directive’s standards. The later law bans cultivation of all GMO maize in France. The French maize seed federation sought to appeal the earlier rule despite the symbolic nature of the action to argue that the ban was not based on sound science. “It was more a matter of principle that we conduct this appeal to show there was no scientific basis to the ban,” the organization’s managing director told Reuters. “In concrete terms, it…
The EU General Court has confirmed a European Commission decision finding that German company Dextro Energy's health claims for its glucose supplements are contrary to the messages of national and international authorities on the health risks associated with sugar consumption. The commission decided the issue in January 2015 despite advice from the European Food Safety Authority suggesting that the consumption of glucose could be linked to normal energy-yielding metabolism. "Even if those health claims were to be authorised only subject to specific conditions of use and/or were accompanied by additional messages or warnings, the Commission considered that the message nevertheless remained confusing for consumers, with the result that the claims in question should not be authorised," stated a March 16, 2016, press release from the General Court summarizing the opinion. Issue 598
The Supreme Court of Spain has reportedly dismissed a challenge brought by the Comité Interprofessionel Du Vin de Champagne alleging that Champín, a Spanish fruit-flavored soft drink, infringes the organization’s protected-designation-of-origin rights. The organization asserted that Champín could be confused with Champagne, which may only describe sparkling wines made in that region. The court disagreed, finding that “Champín differs enough with respect to those products protected by the Champagne appellation that the phonetic similarity does not evoke the product.” See The Local, March 10, 2016. Issue 597
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has reportedly affirmed a ruling that Spanish citrus growers must label their fruits when they have used chemicals or preservatives in post-harvest processing. Spain challenged the European Commission’s (EC’s) power to enact the rule, arguing the U.N. Economic Commission for Europe had set voluntary standards only. The lower court noted that even though the EC must consider U.N. standards, it is not required to adopt those guidelines, reasoning that the ECJ reportedly echoed in its ruling. Spain also argued that the rule created an unconstitutional distinction between citrus growers and growers of other fruit, but the lower court found that citrus fruit is often subjected to higher levels of chemical processing and that citrus peels are used differently than the peels of other fruits and vegetables because they are often added to food for additional flavor. See Wall Street Journal, March 3, 2016. …
A German court has reportedly ordered the city of Hamburg to compensate a Spanish vegetable grower falsely linked to a 2011 E. coli outbreak that sickened more than 4,000 people in 16 countries. Vegetable cooperative Frunet asserted that it suffered €2.3 million in damages as a result of its incorrect identification as the source of the outbreak, which was later traced to fenugreek sprouts. The amount of the award has not been confirmed. See Think Spain, October 25, 2015. Meanwhile, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has affirmed a lower court’s decision that the government does not owe tomato growers compensation after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) publicly attributed a 2008 Salmonella outbreak to red tomatoes, then later traced it to jalapeno and serrano peppers. DiMare Fresh, Inc. v. U.S., No. 15-5006 (Fed. Cir., order entered October 28, 2015). “The problem with the Tomato Producers’ contention…
The Finnish Market Court has reportedly backed MS Iceland Dairies in a legal dispute with Arla Foods over the sale of skyr dairy products in Finland. According to media reports, the court ruled that “skyr” is not a generic term for a yogurt-like cultured dairy product, but rather a specific trademark for a product made in Iceland or Denmark according to recipes held by MS Iceland Dairies. The decision bars Arla Foods from marketing or selling skyr in Finland, with violations fetching fines of €500,000. See Iceland Monitor, October 7, 2015; FoodBev.com, October 13, 2015. Issue 582
The European Union’s General Court has rejected an appeal to register “Halloumi” and its Greek alphabet equivalent as Community Trade Marks, deeming the terms descriptive of the cheese product. Republic of Cyprus v. Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Mkt., Nos. T-292/14 and T-293/14 (Gen. Ct., order entered October 7, 2015). The application would have granted trademark protection for “Halloumi” within the European Union. Halloumi is set to receive Protected Designation of Origin status as a cheese produced on the island of Cyprus after the European Commission published the application to register the name in July 2015. As a trademark, however, the term is merely descriptive of the cheese product, the court found. “[T]he applicant acknowledges that the marks applied for have always been perceived by Cypriot consumers and by consumers across the European Union as referring to a particular type of cheese exported from Cyprus, made in a certain…
Germany’s highest court has ruled that Swiss chocolatier Lindt & Sprüngli did not violate German confectioner Haribo’s trademark “Gold Bear” when it began selling a chocolate bear wrapped in gold foil in 2011. Haribo has produced Gold-Bear® gummy bears for several decades, which are sold in gold packages featuring a yellow bear wearing a red ribbon and bow tied around its neck. Lindt’s gold-clad chocolate bear also wears a red ribbon tied in a bow around its neck, styled after the company’s chocolate Easter bunny products. Haribo claimed in 2012 that consumers were likely to be confused by Lindt’s packaging; a trial court agreed, but an intermediate appellate court overturned the ruling. The Federal Court of Justice has affirmed the appellate ruling, reportedly saying in a German-language statement that it wants to avoid the danger of “product design monopolisation.” Information about Haribo’s 2012 complaint appears in Issue 462 of this…
France’s administrative supreme court, Conseil d’Etat, has ruled that PlasticsEurope’s challenge to the country’s ban on bisphenol A (BPA) in food-contact materials can be heard in its Constitutional Council because the legal question presented is new. The plastics group argued that the opinion from the French Agency for Food, Environment and Occupational Health and Safety that the 2012 prohibition cited as justification was inadequate because it was a “danger study” rather than an “evaluation of risks.” The Constitutional Council now has three months to rule on the case. See Bloomberg BNA, June 19, 2015. Issue 570
