and European phases, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has clarified that the registration of a new name can only be adopted by the Commission if the Member State concerned has submitted an application and that the same Member State has verified its validity. This implies that any invalidation of the national phase will compromise the successful outcome of the subsequent European phase, preventing it from continuing9. But that’s not all. Producers can also modify the product specification: the procedure originally provided for in Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been replaced by Regulation (EU) No 2021/2117. In the previous version, a distinction was made between minor and non-minor amendments to the product specification (Article 53). Although both had to be approved by the Commission, non-minor amendments followed the same procedure as for registration, while minor amendments could be approved or rejected directly by the Commission. Under the current regulations, a distinction is made between ‘Union amendments’ and ‘ordinary amendments’ for all PDOs, PGIs, quality wine products and spirits. More specifically, ‘Union amendments’ are those that: a) include a change to the name of the protected designation of origin or protected geographical indication, or to the use of that name; b) risk altering the link referred to in Article 5(1)(b) for protected designations of origin, or the link referred to in Article 5(2)(b) for protected geographical indications; c) concern a traditional speciality guaranteed; d) involve further restrictions on the marketing of the product. Using a residual interpretative criterion, all other changes are considered ordinary. The procedure to be followed in the event of changes by the Union is subject to the same rules as those laid down for registration; the case of ordinary changes is different: their approval and publication takes place within the framework of a procedure identified and managed by the Member State, and the final decision is then communicated to the Commission. So far, the procedure described appears to be consistent with the protection objectives set out above. 9 See CGCE, 6 dicembre 2001, C‑269/99, cit.; CGUE, 29 gennaio 2020, C-785/18, GAEC Jeanningros contro Institut national de l’origine et de la qualité (INAO) e altri, where it is clarified that the reasons for a national phase lie in the fact that registration requires the verification of a number of requirements and in-depth knowledge of specific elements, which can best be verified by the competent authorities of the Member State concerned. 401 QUALITY FOOD PRODUCTION: BETWEEN PROTECTION NEEDS
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==