Judgment of the Court of Justice Second Chamber, 4 October 2024, Protéines France and Others, C-438/23

• Date: 04 October 2024
• Year: 2024

86

concluded before the markets opened, in order inter alia to avoid a break in Banco Popular’s critical

functions. Secondly, the FROB accepted Banco Santander’s offer when it appeared certain that none

of the other institutions invited to participate in the sale process would be making a bid. Thirdly, the

SRB had considered that, in those circumstances, it was prudent to accept the conditions of the only

institution to have made a bid and thus to prevent uncontrolled insolvency of Banco Popular which

could, inter alia, have undermined its critical functions. The appellant does not claim that those

findings were vitiated by a manifest error of assessment.

Therefore, the Court of Ju stice considers that the General Court did not err in law in holding that the

SRB could accept Banco Santander’s offer, even though it was submitted after the expiry of the time

limit set in the FROB’s letter of 6 June 2017.

7. CONSUMER PROTECTION: PROVISION OF FOOD INFORMATION

TO CONSUMERS

Judgment of the Court of Justice (Second Chamber), 4 October 2024, Protéines France and

Others, C-438/23

Link to the full text of the judgment

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Regulati on (EU) No 1169/2011 – Provision of fo od information to

consumers – Article 2(2)(n) to (p), and Articles 7, 9 and 17 – Fair practices concerning the names of foods –

Legal names, customary names and descriptive names – Substitution of components or ingredients of a

food – Article 38(1) – Matters specifically harmonised – National measures prohibiting the use of meat-

related names to designate a product containing vegetable proteins

Ruling on a request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (Council of State, France), the

Court of Justice develops its case-law relating to the concept of ‘specific harmonisation’ for the

purposes of Article 38(1) of Regulation No 1169/2011,

188

which, in principle, precludes Member States

from adopting national measures.

Protéines France, which represents the interests of undertakings active in the French market for

vegetable proteins, the Union végétarienne européenne (EVU), the Association végétarienne de

France (AVF), which promote vegetarianism, and Beyond Meat, which manufactures and markets

vegetable protein-based products, have brought actions before the Conseil d’État (Council of State)

seeking the annulment of the decree (‘the decree at issue’) on the use of certain names to designate

foods containing vegetable proteins.

189

By their actions, they argued that the decree at issue, which prohibits the use of names such as ‘steak’

or ‘sausage’ for the purpose of designating processed products containing vegetable proteins, without

or even with the inclusion of additional indications, infringed a number of provisions of Regulation

No1169/2011.

In the course of the proceedings before the Court, the French authorities adopted a new decree

190

which provides for the repeal of the decree at issue. Following a request for information addressed to

188

Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to

consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing

Commission Directive 87/250/EEC, Coun cil Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council, Com mission Directives 2002/67/EC and 2008/5/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004 (OJ 2011

L 304, p. 18).

189

Decree No 2022-947 of 29 June 2022 on the use of certain names to designate foods containin g vegetable proteins (JORF of 30 June 2022,

Text No 3).

190

Decree No 2024-144 of 26 February 2 024 on the use of certain names to designate foods containing vegetable proteins (JORF of 27 Febru ary

2024, Text No 15).