had granted transitional protection on the national territory149. However, pending the European phase, the relevant decree had been challenged and consequently annulled by the Lazio Regional Administrative Court (TAR Lazio) in an immediately enforceable judgment150, of which the Commission had been promptly informed. The Italian administrative authorities had insisted, however, that the Commission proceed with its own examination of the application for registration. In the meantime, the aforementioned judgment of the TAR had been submitted to the Supreme Administrative Court (Consiglio di Stato) for examination. Against this backdrop, the Commission had not suspended the procedure, thus arriving at granting protection to this geographical indication151. It was only later that the Council of State had annulled the decision of the Regional Administrative Court152, thus definitively confirming the validity of the application for protection submitted by the Italian State. In this regard, the EU General Court held that the Commission’s conduct was irregular, since it had granted registration of the PGI at issue on the basis of an application for protection which – at the time of the adoption of the relevant implementing regulation – was invalid, as a result of the ruling made by the national court of first instance. In the Court’s view, this approach violated the principle of good administration, which required the Commission to at least await the outcome of the national court proceedings, before recognising the PGI, in order to ensure that the disputed registration was indeed based on valid national acts. Finally, the Court also considered that the duty to conduct a proper investigation had been violated, since the Commission should have independently assessed the consequences of the absence of a valid specification, thus arriving at one of the following solutions: either the application should be considered inadmissible (because it was incomplete) or the final decision should be postponed until the conclusion of the national court proceedings in question. 149 MIPAAF Directorial Decree of 27 December 2012 on Transitional protection granted at national level to the name “Piadina Romagnola/Piada Romagnola” for which an application has been sent to the European Commission for registration as a protected geographical indication, in GURI 16 January 2013 n. 13. Provisional protection is not provided for TSGs. 150 TAR del Lazio, section II ter, judgment of 15 May 2014, No 5148/2014, ECLI:EN:TARLAZ:2014:5148SENT 151 Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2014/1174 of 24 October 2014 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Piadina Romagnola/Piada Romagnola (PGI)), in OJEU 2014, L 316, p. 3. 152 Council of State, Section III, Judgment of 13 May 2015, 2405/2015 Reg. Prov. Coll., ECLI:EN:CDS:2015:2405SENT 353 FOODSTUFF TRADITION PROTECTION
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==