The consumer can then benefit from the provisions of Articles 17 and 18 of EU Regulation N. 1215/2012, being able to sue the tour package organizer in the Court of his or her domicile. In fact, a recent ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union has established that Article 18 of the Regulation also applies when the consumer and the organizer of a package tour are based in the same member state, but the trip had a foreign destination. In such a case, the regulation of the Regulation determines not only the court authority of the state before which the compensation case is to be brought, but also, within this authority, the territorially competent court32. CONCLUSIONS The food supply chain and especially the restaurant business is subject to constraints, commitments, controls and responsibilities. European and Italian domestic regulations have built a system of important, cogent, reinforced responsibilities for those who work in contact with food, assemble it and offer it to the palate and taste of consumers. Jurisprudence, domestic and European, has also in recent years strengthened and probably aggravated the liability profiles of the restaurateur. All this complex legislation and practice certainly brings commitment and demands seriousness from gastronomy and restaurant operators. But we must also try to see this set of standards, principles and rules from another point of view. The law, the European Union and Italy in particular confirm that they consider catering and the production and processing of food and beverages as a driving sector, a bearer of well-being and an expression of culture, tradition and hospitality. Welcoming a customer to a restaurant is not just-since we have now realized it-selling food: it is making the patron a participant in the place, the culture and the joy of living connected to good food and quality of life. qualified professional diligence. Article 43 of Legislative Decree No. 79/2011, the Code of State Regulations on the regulation and market of tourism, affirms the liability of the travel organiser and the seller, according to their respective responsibilities. 32 European Union Court of Justice, C-774/2022. The case concerned a claim brought by a consumer domiciled in Nuremberg against a travel organiser in Munich. Following the criterion indicated in the ruling by the European Court of Justice, which resulted from a preliminary reference by the German court for the correct interpretation of Article 18 of the Regulation, territorial jurisdiction was correctly established by the consumer at the court of his domicile, in Nuremberg. 165 THE RESTAURATEUR AND THE CUSTOMER’S HEALTH
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==