However, their protection and safeguarding is intertwined with private law interests, which concern not only companies located in the territory of the GI, but also competing companies that trade in fungible products, whose headquarters may be located not only in Europe but also outside the European area, as well as consumers. The European legislator, always motivated by the need to ensure free competition, has provided for additional remedies to protect third parties with respect to the producers of products guaranteed by certification, who may oppose the registration of a new GI or the modification of the relevant specification. In particular, current legislation stipulates that opposition to an application for the registration or modification of production specifications may only be brought by individuals with a ‘legitimate interest’, despite the absence of a precise definition of this legal concept10. IV. THE NEEDS OF THE FREE MARKET The safeguarding and protection of high-quality food production is entrusted to the above-described mechanism, which creates a private space while remaining compatible with the free-market rules that govern the European space. However, European legislators have always maintained a firm stance in favour of a free market and, in pursuing this objective, have paid particular attention to harmful conduct that could undermine market dynamics. In particular, it is possible to draw on the extensive case law developed by the European Commission to understand the intense efforts made by European supervisory bodies to combat changes to regulations that could be exploited to obtain an undue and unjustified competitive advantage to the detriment not 10 The 1992 regulation did not refer to legitimate interest but to economically legitimate interest, further restricting the scope of application of the rule. Recital 25 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 specifies, however, that “the registration procedure at Union level should allow any natural or legal person having a legitimate interest in a Member State other than that of the application, or in a third country, to assert their rights by notifying their opposition”. As is well known, the concept of legitimate interest is one of the most debated and controversial. Italian doctrine on the subject is endless. An important contribution to its theorisation was made by Cass., 22 July 1999, no. 500, whose observations were then also shared by the Cons. St., ad. pl., 23 March 2011, no. 3, which defined legitimate interest as a subjective situation, directly protected by the legal system, which consists of a series of procedural and substantive powers capable of influencing administrative action. Without any claim to exhaustiveness, M. Magri, L’interesse legittimo oltre la teoria generale, Rimini, 2017, M. Nigro, Ma che cos’e questo interesse legittimo? Interrogativi vecchi e nuovi spunti di riflessione, in Foro it., 1987, p. 470; F.G. Scoca, Interesse legittimo. Storia e teoria, Giappichelli, Torino, 2017; Id., Attualità dell’interesse legittimo?, in Dir. proc. amm., 2011, p. 379; F. Trimarchi Banfi, L’ interesse legittimo: teoria e prassi, in Dir. proc. amm., 2013, p. 1005 ss. 402 STEFANIA PEDRABISSI
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==