Abstract
This chapter introduces the part dedicated to answers from agri-food regulation to emerging interests of consumers.
The essays contained in this part are focused on the relationship between tradition and innovation in food production and highlight the controversial coexistence of these two (apparently) opposed faces of the food chain.
The author of this introduction underlines that the “image” of the consumer is a guiding thread (or a common element) to different aspects of this issue, considering that the consumer is the final target of information and safety rules.
In fact, the lack of a clear definition of the characteristics of consumer as contracting party in transnational commercial relationships and the high level of abstraction on this subject in EU law determines juridical uncertainty, taking into account the increase in business of consumer international trade.
The author concludes his essay by recommending a solution at the international level, which needs to be more consistent with the effective dynamics of consumption.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
See Paoletti (2005).
- 3.
- 4.
See The Holy Bible, Book of Leviticus, 11, 9–10. For a wider analysis of the impact of Christianity on food consumption see Montanari (2015).
- 5.
See Huis et al. (2013).
- 6.
See the Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on novel foods, amending Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EC) No 258/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1852/2001, OJ [2015] L 327/1.
- 7.
See, as examples, CJEU, Case C-210/96 Gut Springenheide [1998] ECR I-04657; Case c-99/01 Gottfried Linhart e Hans Biffl [2002] ECR I-9375, paras 31–32; Case C-44/01 Pippig [2003] ECR I-03095, para 55; Case C-218/01 Henkel KGaA [2004] ECR. I-1725, paras 47, 52, 53; Cases from C-468/01 P to C-472/01 P, Procter & Gamble Company [2004] ECR I-5141, paras 57, 58; Case C-136/02 P Mag Instrument Inc. [2004] ECR I-9165, paras 19, 20, 27; Case C-365/04 Lid [2006] ECR I-8501, para 78; Case C-381/05 De Landtsheer Emmanuel SA c. Comité Interprofessionel du Vin de Champagne, Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin SA [2007] ECR I-3115, para 23. For a wide analisys of the evolution of the EU consumer policy see Reich et al (2014); Weatherill (2013).
- 8.
See CJEU Case C-220/98, Estée Lauder Cosmetics GmbH & Co. OHG c. Lancaster Group GmbH, [2000] ECR I-117.
- 9.
See the UE Tribunal Case T-81/03, Mast-Jägermeister AG c. UAMI [2006] ECR II-5409, points 95–97, and, with the same orientation, Cases T-350/04 to 352/04, Bitburger Brauerei Th. Simon GmbH c. UAMI [2006] ECR II-04255, point 64.
- 10.
See, CJEU Case C-362/88, GN-INNO-BM [1990], ECR I-667; Case C-238/89, Pall [1990] ECR I-4827; Case C-126/91, Yves Rocher [1993] ECR I-2361Case 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. When it is possible the Court states directly the consumer’s ability in perception or understanding the reality. When the case request a specific evaluation out of the Court’s powers the national Judge must ascertain it taking into account the ECJ case law (see, on this point, Case 94/82, De Kilkvorsh 1983] ECR p. 947; Case C-313/94, f.lli Graffione [1996] ECR I-6039; Case C-210/96, Gut Springenheide [1998] ECR I-04657; Case c-99/01; Case C-303/97, Verbraucher Schutzverein eV e Sektkellerei G.C. Kessler GmbH [1999] ECR I-513; Case C-44/01, Pippig [2003] ECR I-03095.
- 11.
See the Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (“Unfair Commercial Practices Directive”), OJ [2005] L 149/22.
- 12.
See CJEU, Pall [1990] ECR I-4827, para 19; Mars [1995] ECR I-1923, para 19; Case C-465/98, Verein gegen Unwesen in Handel und Gewerbe Köln eV v. Adolf Darbo AG [2000] ECR I-2297, point 28, and the Opinions of General Advocates Tesauro, Case C-373/90 [1991], Criminal proceedings against X, ECR I-131; Leger, Case C-465/98, Darbo [2000] ECR I-2297; Misho, Case C-169/99, Schwarzkopf [2000] ECR I-5901; Geelhoed, Cases C-421/00, C-426/00 and 16/01, Renate Sterbenz e Paul Dieter Haug [2002] ECR I-1009.
- 13.
Article 5(3) of the Directive states that “commercial practices which are likely to materially distort the economic behaviour only of a clearly identifiable group of consumers who are particularly vulnerable to the practice or the underlying product because of their mental or physical infirmity, age or credulity in a way which the trader could reasonably be expected to foresee, shall be assessed from the perspective of the average member of that group (…).”
- 14.
On this point see Jagielska and Jagielski (2012), pp. 336–353.
- 15.
See the annex adopted by the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe on May, 17th, 1973 (7th Sitting), published on the official journal and available on line.
- 16.
See the last release of this document available on internet at unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditccplpmisc2016d1_en.pdf. Accessed January 2017.
- 17.
See the UNCTAD Guidelines for Consumer Protection, point II, “Scope and application,” pp. 6–7. unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditccplpmisc2016d1_en.pdf. Accessed January 2017.
References
Bolisani E (ed) (2008) Building the knowledge society on the internet: sharing and exchanging knowledge in networked environments. Information Science Reference, New York
Costa-Neto EM (2003) Insetos como fontes de alimentos para o homem: Valoração de recursos considerados repugnantes. Interciencia 28:10
Fabris A (ed) (2007) Etica del virtuale, Vita e Pensiero. Pubblicazioni dell'Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milano
Foliart E (1999) Insects as food: why western attitude is important. Ann Rev Entomol 44:21–50
Heim H (1998) Virtual realism. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Huis AV et al (2013) Edible insects. Future prospects for food and feed security. FAO, Rome
Jagielska M, Jagielski M (2012) Are consumer rights human rights? In: Devenney J, Kenny M (eds) European consumer protection. Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 336–353
Keim W et al (eds) (2014) Global knowledge production in the social science. Made in circulation. Ashgate Publishing, Farnham
Montanari M (2015) Magiare da cristiani. Diete, digiuni, banchetti. Storia di una cultura. Rizzoli, Milano
Montanari M, Sabban F (2006) Storia e geografia dell’alimentazione, vol 1–2. UTET, Torino
Paoletti MG (ed) (2005) Ecological implications of Minilivestock. Potential of insects, rodents, frogs and snalis. Science Publishers, Enfield
Reich N et al (eds) (2014) European consumer law. Intersentia, Cambridge
Weatherill S (2013) EU consumer law and policy. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Zuckerman E (2013) Rewire. Digital cosmopolitans in the age of connection. W. W. Norton & Co., New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rubino, V. (2017). The Emerging Interests of Consumers: Answers from the Agri-Food Regulation. In: Alabrese, M., Brunori, M., Rolandi, S., Saba, A. (eds) Agricultural Law. LITES - Legal Issues in Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64756-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64756-2_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-64755-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-64756-2
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)