To establish such liability, the claimant must usually demonstrate the occurrence of damage, a causal link between the product and the harm, and unlawful or negligent conduct by the provider. Where the harm is non-material, for example, if the consumer feels their ethical or philosophical convictions have been seriously violated, damages may be awarded in systems that recognise the protection of personality rights or consumer dignity,37 even without physical injury.38 5.2 Administrative Liability for Food Safety and Misleading Information Under the General Food Law Regulation, all food placed on the market must be safe. This includes not only microbiological safety but also the absence of substances that could render the food unfit for consumption.39 Although vegan dishes are generally considered low-risk from a microbiological perspective, the presence of undeclared allergens such as dairy, eggs, or fish derivatives can create significant health hazards. Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on food hygiene requires that food business operators implement Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) procedures to prevent such risks.40 Even in the absence of intent or gross negligence, inadequate allergen control or poor kitchen practices may result in administrative penalties for unsafe food.41 In addition to safety concerns, EU law prohibits misleading food information. Article 16 of the General Food Law Regulation and Article 36 of the FIC Regulation require that all food-related information, including voluntary labels like “vegan”, accurately reflect the product’s nature, ingredients, and method of preparation. This principle was confirmed in the CJEU’s judgment in Teekanne, where the Court held that a product’s overall presentation, including packaging, visual elements, and omissions, could be misleading even if the ingredient list was factually correct.42 Applied to vegan claims, this implies that menus, verbal assurances, or marketing language may violate EU law if they suggest vegan content that is not substantiated by the actual preparation process. Such practices may also fall under the prohibition of misleading commercial practices set out in the UCPD.43 37 For more on this, see Chapter 2. 38 For non-pecuniary damages arising from breach of contract, see Damjan Možina, ‘Nepremoženjska škoda zaradi kršitve pogodbe’ in IV. dnevi civilnega prava : Portorož, 30. in 31. marec 2006 (GV Založba 2006) 15–28. 39 General Food Law Regulation art. 14. 40 Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs [2004] OJ L139/1. 41 Ibid art. 5. 42 Case C-195/14 Teekanne GmbH & Co. KG v Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb eV EU:C:2015:361. 43 UCPD arts 6–7. 176 KATJA ŠTEMBERGER BRIZANI
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==