Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T12:00:39.767Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Uses and Potential Abuses of “Negative Claims” in the EU: The Urgent Need for Better Regulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Ignacio Carreño  and
Paolo Vergano
Ignacio Carreño
Affiliation:
FratiniVergano – European Lawyers, http://www.fratinivergano.eu
Paolo Vergano
Affiliation:
FratiniVergano – European Lawyers, http://www.fratinivergano.eu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

“Negative claims” can be defined as claims indicating that certain ingredients, nutrients or substances are not present in a foodstuff. Legitimate uses of regulated negative claims in the EU include some nutrition claims and “gluten-free” claims. Some EU Member States have legislated on “GM-free” claims. The article describes in more detail some cases (i.e., BPA-free, MSG-free, Aspartame-free and palm oil-free), where negative claims are used with an implied message that whatever is used instead of the often “demonised” substance is safer, healthier or greener. The article argues that EU and EU Member States’ legislators and regulators should ensure that consumers are not misled by astute marketing techniques that have no informative agendas, but simply aim at denigrating certain products in order to promote “free-from” products. This issue is particularly timely and important given the imminent application of the EU's Food Information Regulation and the additional costs that it will impose on the industry in the name of providing complete, reliable and evidence-based information to consumers.

Type
Articles
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , December 2014 , pp. 469 - 490
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
© Ignacio Carreño and Paolo Vergano 2014 This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014

References

1 Evelyn Roll, “Frei von Sünde”, Süddeutsche Zeitung, 11/12 January 2014 (in the weekend edition).

2 Raquel Vidales, “Sin gluten no quiere decir más sano”, El Pais 11 April 2014. Available on the Internet at: http://sociedad.elpais.com/sociedad/2014/04/11/actualidad/1397242694_867535.html (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

3 Supermarkets cash in on unfounded fears about food and health, The Guardian, 9 June 2013. Available on the Internet at: http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2013/may/09/supermarkets-unfounded-fears-food-health (last accessed on 15 November 2014) See also: Rick Pendrous, “Supermarkets must stop scaremongering, say scientists”, Foodmanufacture.co.uk, 1 May 2013. Available on the Internet at: http://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Food-Safety/Supermarkets-must-stop-scaremongering-say-scientists (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

4 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety, OJ 2002 L 31/1.

5 OJ 2000 L 109/29 (Repealed by the FIR, but end of validity 13.12.2014).

6 OJ 1990 L 276/40 (Repealed by the FIR, but end of validity 13.12.2014).

7 Full title: Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council 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, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002/67/EC and 2008/5/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004, OJ 2011 L 304/18.

8 OJ 2006 L 404/9.

9 OJ 2006 L 376, repealing Council Directive 84/450/EEC relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading advertising, OJ 1984 L 250/17.

10 OJ 2009 L 16/3.

11 For the sake of clarity and consistency, the EU established, in Regulation (EU) No 609/2013 (OJ 2013 L 181/35), that rules on the use of the statements “gluten-free” and “very low gluten” should be in the future regulated under the FIR, in particular under Article 21 of the FIR on the labelling of certain substances or products causing allergies or intolerances listed in Annex II to the FIR. Article 36(3)d) of the FIR provides that the European Commission shall adopt implementing acts in relation to the voluntary information on the absence or reduced presence of gluten in food. Thus, the Commission has adopted Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1155/2013 amending the FIR as regards information on the absence or reduced presence of gluten in food, OJ 2013 L 306/7.

12 OJ 2014 L 228/5.

13 OJ 2006 L 401/1.

14 The opinion of the ALS is available on the Internet at: http://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/01_Lebensmittel/ALS_ALTS/ALS_Stellungnahmen_98_Sitzung_2011.pdf?__blob=publicationFile--amp-v=2 (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

15 EFSA Journal 2010;8(9):1777. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1777.

16 OJ 2003 L 268/1.

17 OJ 2003 L 268/24.

18 See the answer given by Commissioner Borg on behalf of the European Commission to the Parliamentary question P-009834/2013 of 26 September 2013. Available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=P-2013-009834&language=EN (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

19 Décret no. 2012-128 du 30 janvier 2012 relatif à l'étiquetage des denrées alimentaires issues de filières qualifiées “sans organismes génétiquement modifies”). JORF n°26/2012 p. 1770, texte n° 27.

20 Art. L. 531-2-1 of the French Environmental Code, introduced by law number 2008-595 of 25 June 2008, concerning genetically modified organisms. Available on the Internet at: http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do;jsessionid=A2D9B3B486E062EDB2F74104D1838D27.tpdjo02v_2?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006074220&idArticle=LEGIARTI000019070290&dateTexte=20140505&categorieLien=id#LEGIARTI000019070290 (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

21 Art. 3 of Decree no. 2012-128.

22 Art. 7 of Decree no. 2012-128.

23 Art. 8 of Decree no. 2012-128.

24 Such as Auchan, Bonduelle, Carrefour and Casino.

25 Available on the Internet at: http://www.bmel.de/DE/Ernaehrung/Kennzeichnung/OhneGentechnik/_Texte/OhneGentechnikKennzeichnung.html (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

26 Gesetz zur Durchführung der Verordnungen der Europäischen Gemeinschaft oder der Europäischen Union auf dem Gebiet der Gentechnik und über die Kennzeichnung ohne Anwendung gentechnischer Verfahren hergestellter Lebensmittel vom 22. Juni 2004 (BGBl. I S. 1244)

27 Art. 3a(2) of the EGDGG.

28 Art. 3a(3) of the EGDGG.

29 Art. 3a(4) of the EGDGG.

30 Art. 3a(5) of the EGDGG.

31 Available on the Internet at: http://www.bmel.de/DE/Ernaehrung/Kennzeichnung/OhneGentechnik/_Texte/OhneGentechnikKennzeichnung.html (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

32 Ohne Gentechnik-Siegel: Mehr Transparenz und Wahlfreiheit beim Lebensmitteleinkauf. Available on the Internet at: Idem.

33 Elaine Watson, “Natural & Clean Label Trends 2013: How clean is your label? And can GMOs ever belong in “natural” products?” Confectionery News, 24 May 2013. Available on the Internet at: http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Markets/Natural-Clean-Label-Trends-2013-How-clean-is-your-label-And-can-GMOs-ever-belong-in-natural-products (last accessed on 15 November 2014); Jess Halliday, “Consumers’ views on natural and clean label terminology”, Confectionery News, 21 June 2010. Available on the Internet at: http://www.confectionerynews.com/Ingredients/Consumers-views-on-natural-and-clean-label-terminology (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

34 Annie-Rose Harrison-Dunn, “Free from “free-from”: Are consumers getting clean label lethargy?”, Food Navigator, 14 May 2014. Available on the Internet at: http://www.foodnavigator.com/Market-Trends/Searching-for-a-label-free-from-free-from-claims (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

35 The opinion of the ALS (ALS Stellungnahmen in German) is available on the Internet at: http://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/01_Lebensmittel/ALS_ALTS/ALS_Stellungnahmen_100_Sitzung_2012.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

36 For a policy overview on BPA see: Alberto Alemanno, “The Fabulous Destiny of Bisphenol A (BPA)”, European Journal of Risk Regulation (hereinafter, EJRR) 4/2010, pp. 397–400; Ragnar E. Lofstedt Risk versus Hazard - How to Regulate in the 21st Century, EJRR 2/2011, pp. 149-168; K. Aschenberger, P. Castello, E. Hoekstra, S. Karakitsios, S. Munn, S. Pakalin, and D. Sarigiannis, “Bisphenol A and Baby Bottles: Challenges and Perspectives” (Ispra: European Commission, Joint Research Centre 2010).

37 Krishnan, A., Strathis, P., Permuth, S., Tikes, L., and Feldman, D., “Bisphenol A: An Estrogenic Substance is Released from Polycarbonate Flasks during Autoclaving”, 132 Endocrinology (1993), pp. 2279–2286 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 Tessa Fox, Esther Versluis and Marjolein B.A. van Asselt, “Regulating the Use of Bisphenol A in Baby and Children's Products in the European Union: Current Developments and Scenarios for the Regulatory Future”, EJRR 1/2011, pp. 21-35.

39 Id.

40 Available on the Internet: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_consumer/dyna/consumervoice/create_cv.cfm?cv_id=716 (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

41 Ragnar E. Lofstedt, “Risk versus Hazard - How to Regulate in the 21st Century”, EJRR 2/2011, pp. 149-168: EFSA examined the research findings surrounding Bisphenol A on three separate occasions, most recently in 2010, eg., EFSA, “Scientific opinion of Bisphenol A; Evaluation of a study investigating its neurodevelopmental toxicity, review of recent scientific literature on its toxicity and advice on the Danish risk assessment of Bisphenol A”, 1829 EFSA Journal (2010), pp.1–110.

42 EFSA, “Scientific opinion of the panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food (AFC) related to toxicokinetics of Bisphenol A. Question EFSA –Q-2008-382”, 759 EFSA Journal (2008), pp. 1–10.

43 Commission Directive 2002/72/EC relating to plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with foodstuffs, OJ 2002 L 220/18.

44 Commission Directive 2011/8/EU amending Directive 2002/72/EC as regards the restriction of use of Bisphenol A in plastic infant feeding bottles, OJ 2011 L 26/11.

45 Commission Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 on plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with food, OJ 2011 L 12/1.

46 See: DRAFT Scientific Opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence BPA in foodstuffs – Part: exposure assessment, Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF), European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).

47 Danish Order on food contact materials: Bekendtgørelse om fødevarekontaktmaterialer 579/2011 (§ 8, stk. 2). Available on the Internet at: https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=136917&exp=1 (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

48 Regulation No 991/2012 of 20 December 2012 amending the Food Regulation No 813/2006, Svensk författningssamling (SFS), 4.1.2013, p.1.

49 Loi du 4 septembre 2012 modifiant la loi du 24 janvier 1977 relative à la protection de la santé des consommateurs en ce qui concerne les denrées alimentaires et les autres produits, visant à interdire le bisphénol A dans les contenants de denrées alimentaires publiée au Moniteur Belge le 24 septembre 2012. This amendment was based on the opinion of the Belgium Superior Health Council, issued on 3 November 2012.

50 LOI n° 2012-1442 du 24 décembre 2012 visant à la suspension de la fabrication, de l'importation, de l'exportation et de la mise sur le marché de tout conditionnement à vocation alimentaire contenant du bisphénol A, OJ of the French Republic (OJFR), 26.12.2012, text 2 of 154.

51 Effets sanitaires du bisphénol A, Rapport d’expertise collective, Connaissances relatives aux usages du bisphénol A, Rapport d’étude, Septembre 2011. Available on the Internet at: http://www.anses.fr/sites/default/files/documents/CHIM-Ra-BisphenolA.pdf(last accessed on 15 November 2014).

52 Available on the Internet at: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/bisphenol.htm?wtrl=01 and http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/140117.htm (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

53 MSG sales growth flags amid negative publicity of 3 October 2011. Available on the Internet at: http://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Ingredients/MSG-sales-growth-flags-amid-negative-publicity (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

54 First series of food additives of various technological functions (Opinion expressed on 18 May 1990, Directorate General Internal Market and Industrial Affairs, EUR 13416. Available on the Internet at: http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/reports/scf_reports_25.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

55 Food Regulation: Law, Science, Policy, and Practice, By Neal D. Fortin, John Wiley & Sons, 20 Sep 2011, chapter 7.3 food additives, 7.3.9 MSG.

56 OJ 2008 L 354/16.

57 OJ 2011 L 295/1.

58 Draft report (PE 355.470v01-00) “Food additives other than colours and sweeteners and Directive 94/35/EC on sweeteners for use in foodstuffs” of 12 May 2005, Proposal for a directive (COM(2004)0650.

59 Available on the Internet at: http://www.codexalimentarius.net/gsfaonline/additives/details.html?id=276 (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

60 WHO 1988. Toxicological Evaluation of Certain Food Additives. WHO Food Additives Series NO 22, Cambridge University Press.

61 Food safety New Zealand FSANZ Monosodium Glutamate (2003). A safety assessment. Technical Report Series No. 20. Canberra: Food Standards Australia New Zealand. Available on the Internet at: http://www.foodsafety.govt.nz/elibrary/industry/monosodium_glutamate-science_research.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

62 The UK Food Standards Agency on Aspartame. Available on the Internet at: http://www.food.gov.uk/science/additives/aspartame/ (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

63 According to Annex III 2.1, foods containing a sweetener or sweeteners authorised pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 must state “with sweetener(s)” accompanying the name of the food.

64 OJ 2010 L 80/19.

65 EFSA ANS Panel, 2013. Scientific Opinion on the re-evaluation of aspartame (E 951) as a food additive. EFSA Journal 2013;11(12):3496, 263 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3496.

66 FIR repeals as of 13 December 2014 Commission Directive 2008/5/EC concerning the compulsory indication on the labelling of certain foodstuffs of particulars other than those provided for in Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ 2008 L 27/12.

67 Ben Bouckley, “We’re in a better place on aspartame: Coca- Cola Enterprises boss unshaken by US diet soda slide”, BeverageDaily. com, 25 April 2014, available on the Internet at: http://www.beveragedaily.com/Manufacturers/We-re-in-a-better-place-on-aspartame-Coca-Cola-Enterprises-boss-unshaken-by-US-diet-soda-slide (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

68 Mahy, Aude and Pauwels, Filip, “Chapter 4 Belgium” in Mahy, Aude and Pauwels, Filip (ed), Advertising Food in Europe (Berlin: Lexxion, 2014), p. 67 et sqq., at p. 104Google Scholar.

69 For example the French retailer Casino's engagement to withdraw palm oil from 350 products in 2012. Available on the Internet at: http://www.supercasino.fr/Votre-magasin-s-engage.html (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

70 COM(2008) 40 final, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision of food information to consumers.

71 Available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=CRE&reference=20100615&secondRef=ITEM-005&language=EN&ring=A7-2010-0109 (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

72 Available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=CRE&reference=20100616&secondRef=ITEM-009&language=EN&ring=A7-2010-0109#3-294 (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

73 OJ 1979 L 33/1.

74 Actualisation des apports nutritionnels conseillés pour les acides gras, Rapport d’expertise collective “Update on Nutritional Intakes advised regarding Fatty Acids”, ANSES May 2011. Available on the Internet at: https://www.anses.fr/sites/default/files/documents/NUT2006sa0359Ra.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

75 McNamara, Donald J., Palm oil and Health: A case of Manipulated Perception and Misuse of Science, Journal of the American College of Nutrition, Volume 29, Number 3(S), June 2010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

76 Astrup, Arne et al., “The role of reducing intakes of saturated fat in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: where does the evidence stand in 2010?” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 93 (4): 684–688. January 2011. doi:10.3945/ajcn.110.004622CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

77 Sundram, Kalyana, Ravigadevi Sambanthamurth and Yew-Ai Tan: Palm fruit chemistry and nutrition. Asian Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2003; 12: 355–362 Google Scholar.

78 In the 1980s, there were various campaigns against palm oil in the US, mostly by the American Soybean Association (hereinafter, ASA). When the US Congress was considering the adoption of the Nutrition Labelling and Education Act of 1990 (hereinafter, NLEA), the ASA lobbied for the use of “no palm oil” labels on food products. ASA's efforts failed, and the legislation was adopted without provisions of this sort. The FDA even sent out warning letters to companies who used “no palm oil” labels on baked goods containing saturated or hydrogenated fats and oils, stating that the labels were false and misleading, and thus a violation of §403(a)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. After the adoption of the NLEA, more campaigns were launched against palm oil. The FDA eventually adopted 21 C.F.R. §101.13, under which claims such as “no palm oil” are not allowed, absent preapproval under 21 C.F.R. §101.69. According to 56 Fed. Reg. 60421-01 at 60423, the FDA reasoned that “claims such as ”contains no palm oil” and “made with 100% vegetable oil,” convey an implied message that the product is low in, or free of, saturated fat. Therefore, FDA defined an implied nutrient content claim in §101.13(b)(2) as any claim that describes the food, or an ingredient therein, in a manner that implies that a nutrient is absent or present in a certain amount or that may be useful to consumers in selecting foods that are helpful in achieving a total diet that conforms to current dietary recommendations (e.g., “healthy”). Links to FDA guidance available on the Internet at: http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/LabelingNutrition/ucm064908.htm (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

79 Food and Agriculture Organisation, 2009, ResourceStat, FAO statistical database on resources cited in: World Growth, Green Papers: Issue IV “Caught Red Handed: The Myths, exaggerations and Distortions of Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and Rainforest Action Network, The Campaigns Against South-East Asia’s Poor, Mai 2010. Available on the Internet at: http://worldgrowth.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/WG_Green_Paper_Caught_Red_Handed_5_10.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

80 Food and Agriculture Organisation, 2009, ResourceStat, FAO statistical database on resources cited in World Growth, “Palm Oil: The Sustainable Oil”, September 2009.

81 Food and Agriculture Organisation, 2010, The Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010, March 2010. Available on the Internet at: http://www.fao.org/forestry/fra/fra2010/en/ (last accessed on 15 November 2014); World Growth, Green Papers: Issue IV “Caught Red Handed: The Myths, exaggerations and Distortions of Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and Rainforest Action Network, The Campaigns Against South-East Asia's Poor, Mai 2010. available on the Internet at: http://worldgrowth.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/WG_Green_Paper_Caught_Red_Handed_5_10.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

82 FAO publishes key findings of global forest resources assessment, 25 March 2010. Available on the Internet at: http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/40893/icode/ (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

83 Food and Agriculture Organisation, 2010, The Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010, March 2010. Available on the Internet at: http://www.fao.org/forestry/fra/fra2010/en/ (last accessed on 15 November 2014)

84 Food and Agriculture Organisation, 2009, ResourceStat, FAO statistical database on resources cited in: World Growth, Green Papers: Issue IV “Caught Red Handed: The Myths, exaggerations and Distortions of Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and Rainforest Action Network, The Campaigns Against South-East Asia’s Poor, Mai 2010. Available on the Internet at: http://worldgrowth.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/WG_Green_Paper_Caught_Red_Handed_5_10.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

85 Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (2011), Second National Communication to the UNFCCC. Available on the Internet at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/malnc2.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

86 Convention on Biological Diversity – Country Profile: Malaysia. Available on the Internet at: http://www.cbd.int/countries/profile/?country=my#status (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

87 Id.

88 Dr. Yusof Basiron (2012), Malaysian Responsible Palm Oil: Assuring Sustainable Supply of Oils & Fats Into the Future, presented at the Palm Oil Trade Fair & Seminar China 2012. Available on the Internet at: http://www.mpoc.org.my/upload/P4_TanSriDatukDr_YusofBasiron_POTSChina2012.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

89 Data retrieved from FAOSTAT: http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=567#ancor (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

90 Keith Boyfield, Dispelling the myths: Palm oil and the environmental lobby; Adam Smith Institute. Available on the Internet at: http://www.adamsmith.org/sites/default/files/resources/Dispelling-the-myths.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

91 See: World Bank, Forest area (% of land area). Available on the Internet at: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.FRST.ZS (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

92 Orang-Utan Conservation Colloquium 2009, retrieved from “2009 Yearly Report Kinabatangan Orang-Utan Conservation Project”. Available on the Internet at: http://www.hutan.org.my/ (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

93 The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Pongopygmaeus (Bornean Orangutan). Available on the Internet at: http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/17975/0/ (last accessed on 15 November 2014); Juliane Reinecke et al, Palm Oil Under Discussion: The Pros and Cons of an Agricultural Raw Material in Sustainable Food Production, June 2011. Available on the Internet at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1856409 (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

94 Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) website. Available on the Internet at: http://www.rspo.org/file/rspo_palmoil_infographic_dec12.jpg (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

95 Available on the Internet at: http://www.ispo-org.or.id/index.php?lang=en (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

96 MSPO acceptance at international level a challenge to ministry, 3 April 2014. Available on the Internet at: http://www.theborneopost.com/2014/04/03/mspo-acceptance-at-international-level-a-challenge-to-ministry (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

97 UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, “Poverty will make the Great Apes History”, 1 September 2005. Available on the Internet at: http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=452&ArticleID=4915&l=en (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

98 “Global Trade and Environmental Impact of the EU Biofuels Mandate” (2010). Study elaborated by the International Food Policy Institute (IFPRI) for the Directorate General for Trade of the European Commission. Available on the Internet at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/march/tradoc_145954.pdf (page 64) (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

99 J.M. Van Zutphen et al. (2011). LCI comparisons of five vegetable oils as feedstock for biodiesel. Journal of Oil Palm & The Environment, 2:25-37.

100 Data from the UK Government Department of Transport. Available on the Internet at: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/environment/rt-fo/govrecrfa.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014). The UNEP study “Guidance on the Process for selecting alternatives to hcfcs in foams” is available on the Internet at: http://www.unep.fr/ozonaction/information/mmcfiles/7435-e-foam__.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

101 “The World Bank Group Framework and IFC Strategy for Engagement in the Palm Oil Sector”; World Bank and International Finance Corporation (2011). Available on the Internet at: http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/159dce004ea3bd0fb359f71dc0e8434d/WBG+Framework+and+IFC+Strategy_FINAL_FOR+WEB.pdf?MOD=AJPERES (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

102 “Taking the pulse of the planet: connecting science with policy”, UNEP Global Environmental Alert Service (2011). Available on the Internet at: http://www.unep.org/pdf/Dec_11_Palm_Plantations.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

103 OJ 1990 L 276/40.

104 This definition is also found in point 2 of Annex I of the FIR.

105 Arguably, it could even be claimed that some consumers understand such claim as meaning that the product contains no fat or oil at all.

106 Wolfgang Voit/Markus Grube. Lebensmittelinformationsverordung, Kommentar, C.H.Beck 2013, Art. 7, 332-333.

107 Statement relating to “palm oil-free” logos by a DDPP (Directions départementales de la protection des populations) of 24 January 2013, later confirmed by the DGCCRF (Direction générale de la concurrence, de la consommation et de la répression des fraudes).

108 Version 2, November 2011. Available on the Internet at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/204320/Nutrition_and_health_claims_guidance_November_2011.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

109 Criteria for the use of the terms fresh, pure, natural etc. in food labelling (Revised in July 2008). Available on the Internet at: http://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/multimedia/pdfs/markcritguidance.pdf (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

110 The opinion of the ALS (“ALS Stellungnahmen” in German) is available on the Internet at: http://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/01_Lebensmittel/ALS_ALTS/ALS_Stellungnahmen_98_Sitzung_2011.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

111 Mahy, Aude and Pauwels, Filip, “Chapter 4 Belgium” in Mahy, Aude and Pauwels, Filip (ed), Advertising Food in Europe (Berlin: Lexxion, 2014), p. 67 et sqq., at p. 104Google Scholar.

112 OJ 2006 L 376/21.

113 See Case C-362/88 GB-INNO-BM [1990] ECR I-667; Case C-238/89 Pall [1990] ECR I-4827; Case C-126/91 Yves Rocher [1993] ECR I-2361; Case C-315/92 Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb [1994] ECR I-317; Case C-456/93 Langguth [1995] ECR I-1737; Case C-470/93 Mars [1995] ECR I-1923) and, in particular, Case C-210/96 Gut Springenheide and Tusky [1998] ECR I-4657, paragraph 31.

114 Case C-303/97 Sektkellerei Kessler [1999] ECR I-513 paragraph 36.

115 Case C-220/98 Estée Lauder [2000] ECR I-117, paragraph 27.

116 Case C-30/99 Commission v. Ireland [2001] ECR I-4619, paragraph 32.

117 OLG Hamburg, IIC-RR 2010, 70, Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht, GRUR-RR 2010, 70.

118 Wolfgang Voit/Markus Grube. Lebensmittelinformationsverordung, Kommentar, C.H.Beck 2013, Art. 7, 146.

119 European Commission, DG Sanco, Guidelines for Making and Assessing Environmental Claims. Available on the Internet at: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/cons_safe/news/green/guidelines_en.pdf (Last accessed on 15 November 2014).

120 The standard is available on the Internet at: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=23146. Many countries use the standard as a basis to inform national codes and guidance, such as the UK Government in its “Green Claims Guidance” of February 2011.

121 Outline of a possible Community approach in the area of “Green Claims” - consultation document. Available on the Internet at: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/cons_int/safe_shop/fair_bus_pract/green_pap_comm/studies/green_claim_en.htm (last accessed on 15 November 2014).

122 Wolfgang Voit/Markus Grube. Lebensmittelinformationsverordung, Kommentar, C.H.Beck 2013, Art. 7, 135.

123 Position “L’ANIA déconseille le recours aux communications pejoratives”, ETIQ 12-1011 of October 2012. Available on the Internet at: http://www.ania.net/ (last accessed on 15 November 2014). ANIA is the acronym for the French Association Nationale des Industries Alimentaires. ANIA's mission includes keeping consumers duly informed and ensuring that conditions of fair competition are met, while it is fundamental that good communication practices are established and respected by operators.

124 Definition extracted from the Larousse Online Dictionary: “Pejorative: That tends to depreciate or denigrate the person, object or concept it refers to”.

125 Article 1382 of the French Civil Code. Jurisprudence has established that three cumulative conditions must be met in order to find “denigration”, i.e.: (i) a company, a group of companies or a sector is identified or identifiable as the target of a malicious critique; (ii) the message is transmitted by any public communication channel; and (iii) the message carries a critique which discredits products or services, and is capable of harming others and/or to capture or divert consumers.

126 The FIR defines “field of vision” as “all the surfaces of a package that can be read from a single viewing point” (Article 2 point 2 (k)).

127 OJ 2013 L 354/1.

128 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision of food information to consumers, 30 January 2008, COM/2008/40 final. See also: Martin Holle, Nutrition Policy in the European Union, Wageningen Working Papers in Law and Governance, Law and governance group 2014/03, p. 37.

129 COM/2007/279 final.

130 COM/2008/40 final, p. 2.

131 COM/2007/279 final, pp. 5-6.

132 A new nutrition claim proposed by the European Commission, where appropriate, after consulting the EFSA, may be blocked by the European Parliament and the Council. The European Commission may involve interested parties, in particular food business operators and consumer groups, in order to evaluate the perception and understanding of the claims in question.

133 Wolfgang Voit/Markus Grube. Lebensmittelinformationsverordung, Kommentar, C.H.Beck 2013, Art. 36, 32.