comply the proportionality and non-discrimination requirements of the Services Directive and the principles of the free movement. Voluntary and purely informative labels are generally less contentious, provided they do not become de facto mandatory through public procurement criteria or inspection practices. When public authorities themselves endorse or administer such labels, the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive limits how quality claims may be communicated to consumers: the underlying criteria must be objective, transparent and capable of independent verification. Technical standardization instruments, such as those developed under the Portuguese CT 144, within the Portuguese Quailty System, may be used as voluntary references under Regulation (EU) No 1025/201211. These standards, however, do not amount classifications or compulsory rating systems. They function as soft-law tools aimed at promoting quality, accessibility and food safety across the hospitality sector, including restaurants. Yet using such standards to create indirect or concealed obligations would risk contravening both the Services Directive and the CJEU’s jurisprudence on the free movement of goods and services12. V. PRIVATE AND REPUTATIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS: FROM MICHELIN TO ALGORITHMIC RANKING 1. Traditional reputational systems: the Michelin model The Michelin Guide is perhaps the most recognizable example of private classification in the hospitality industry. First published in 1900 as a promotional initiative by the Michelin tyre company, it gradually evolved into an international reference for culinary excellence and prestige. Its distinctions (the Michelin stars ★ to ★★★ and the Bib Gourmand, exist entirely outside any statutory framework, yet they exert a quasi-regulatory influence within the tourism economy, shaping both reputation and market behavior. Michelin’s classification model is based on centralized expert evaluation, proprietary and opaque assessment criteria, and full editorial independence 11 European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2012, October 25). Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 on European standardisation. Official Journal of the European Union, L 316, 12–33. 12 While the principles of mutual recognition and proportionality were first articulated in Cassis de Dijon (Case 120/78, the CJEU has since refined their application to services. Cases such as Gebhard (C-55/94), authorisation scheme for restaurant or hospitality activities must satisfy the requirements of overriding reasons relating to the public interest justification, non-discrimination, necessity and proportionality under Articles 49 and 56 TFEU and the Services Directive. 608 AFONSO RIBEIRO CAFÉ
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==