The HOB–vín Judgment: A Failed Attempt to Standardise the Visual Imagery, Packaging and Appeal of Alcohol Products

• Published in: European Journal of Risk Regulation
• Main Author: Alemanno, Alberto
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Cambridge University Press (CUP) 2013
• Subjects: Safety Research; Law; Iceland
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1867299x00002877; https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S1867299X00002877

National rules of a EEA State, such as those at stake in the present judgment, under which a State monopoly on the retail sale of alcohol, may refuse to accept for sale alcoholic beverages that are lawfully produced and marketed in another EEA State on the grounds that the labelling of the products contains loaded or unrelated information, are in breach of Article 18 of Directive 2000/13/EC (‘the labelling Directive’ or ‘Directive’), and cannot be justified by a public health objective. Another rule requiring alcoholic beverages to carry stickers stating that their contents are alcoholic, in addition to the mandatory indication of the actual alcoholic strength by volume, ‘cannot be considered effective’ if it has been adopted without regard to the notification procedure laid down in Article 19 of the labelling Directive. However, individuals and economic operators who have been harmed by the incorrect application of the Directive may rely on the free movement of goods in order to render the State liable for the breach of EEA law, regardless of whether such a directive is being made or has been made part of the legal order of Iceland, since it has been incorporated in the EEA Agreement. Failure to notify the second rule in accordance with the Directive qualifies as a sufficiently serious breach of EEA law. Such a breach entails State liability if the national court finds a direct causal link between the breach of the obligation resting on the State and the damage sustained by the injured party (author's headnote).