Search

In Organisation juive européenne, Vignoble Psagot Ltd v Ministre de l'Économie et des Finances (Organisation juive européenne) (C-363/18), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU or Court) was tasked with deciding what information on its country of origin or place of provenance is mandatory for business according to existing European legislation. This case note summarises the interpretative decisions taken by the AG Hogan (Advocate General or AG) and the Court in their opinion and judgment, respectively. It then considers the broader implications of this case from several perspectives: first, from the perspective of political consumerism and its (potential) role in EU internal market law; second, from the perspective of the enforcement of international law; and third, from the perspective of the coherence of EU food and consumer law including its behavioural dimension.

This article examines to what extent EU law influences standards for geographical indications (GI) control beyond the EU’s regulatory borders. In light of the concept of the “Brussels Effect” and taking a socio-legal comparative methodological approach, it analyzes and compares how the EU and Thailand regulate and implement GI controls in practice. The analysis of the practical implementation of GI controls is based on one case study from the EU (Germany) and two case studies from Thailand. Ultimately, this article discusses to what extent EU GI regulations shape the regulation and practical implementation of GI controls in Thailand. The findings indicate that Thai producers whose products are registered as GIs in the EU adopt the EU’s more stringent standards for control, while fundamental differences between the EU and Thailand prevail on the regulatory level.

The Covid-19 pandemic has the potential to act as a much-needed trigger for changes to the European Union regulations around genetically modified organisms (GMOs). There are two main reasons for this potential development. Firstly, the majority of vaccines under development would fall under Directive 2001/18 on the release of GMOs into the environment. The European Parliament and Council agreed that, in Recital 17 of Regulation 2020/1043, the current approval procedure for GMOs is not well-suited to improving public health. This was driven in particular by the need for vaccine approval in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic; and a more appropriate approval procedure would be applied. Secondly, several studies have shown that the Covid-19 crisis reduces the purchasing power of households and increases their vulnerability in the case of food shortages; and consequent increases in food prices further exacerbate the nutritional problems of vulnerable groups. Modern plant breeding has the potential to provide less expensive solutions to support vulnerable groups. As the Covid-19 crisis drains government budgets, views around GMOs in the EU may change in the light of positive experiences from the approval of Covid-19 vaccines.

New plant breeding technologies (NPBTs), including CRISPR gene editing, are being used widely, and they are driving the development of new crops. They are nevertheless a subject of criticism and discussion. According to a summer 2018 interpretation by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), European Union (EU) law makes most NPBTS subject to regulations governing the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the EU. The implications of this decision have been widely discussed in the literature, thereby stressing the importance of the decision for plant breeding and international trade within and beyond the EU. This contribution summarizes the status of the debate and highlights issues that have thus far not been considered—particularly with regard to the implications of EU regulations for NPBTs for countries outside the EU. We conclude that the practical implications of the CJEU decision reduce the EU’s comparative advantage and increase the cost of achieving the objectives of the European Green Deal. Our findings reveal an almost complete lack of possibilities for changing the current situation. China and countries oriented towards China are the most likely economic beneficiaries of the current situation.