Did the festive snack violate EU law

It was a combination of prosecco and pink powdered peppercorn that was designed to delight consumers during the 2018 Christmas season. In less than a month, the festive snack attracted the attention of the Italian authorities. Seize around 250 tubes of limited-edition Pringles in a supermarket in northern Veneto. The UK caught the attention.

According to the authorities, the administrative grab was ordered due to the fact that the name “prosecco” – which was registered as protected design of origin PDO – was being used “illegally” on packaging. Pringles did not have the Prosecco Consortium‘s approval to use the protected term. Teresa Bellanova is the Italian minister of agriculture and she has promised to fight this type of “identity fraud”. Luca Zaia is the president of Veneto Region (one of two major Prosecco producing regions in northern Italy), who took to Facebook to express his displeasure.

It is important to protect the excellence of our products from any fraud, abuse, or anything that sounds ‘Italian’. This will primarily harm honest producers and promote quality.

Prosecco and EU law

The Italian authorities might have overlooked the EU’s regulations on the use of geographical names protected by law in food and beverage products. The Pringles controversy is similar to a case that was brought against German discount retailer Aldi in 2012. This case eventually reached the EU Court of Justice. The Comite Interprofessional du Vin de Champagne brought proceedings against the supermarket in this case for selling a Champagne Sorbet that it claimed violated the French PDO.

German supermarket chain won a similar case involving a champagne-flavoured sorbet. Shutterstock

The key question was whether the producer exploited PDO champagne’s reputation. The gives PDOs wide protection, allowing them to stop unauthorised parties exploiting the evocative powers of a specific name.

The top EU court, citing the European Commission guidelines for the labeling of foodstuffs that use protected geographical indications (PGIs) as ingredients, noted the importance of “essential characteristics”, namely the taste and aroma of the food. These guidelines stipulate that the percentage of protected ingredients in the product must be listed next to the product name or at least in the ingredient list.

The EU court has concluded that using a PDO to market a food product will not be considered exploiting its reputation (and taking advantage of the PDO) if it incorporates a champagne-like taste as one of the essential characteristics of the product.

All the way to Pringle

This reasoning can be applied to the case of Prosecco. It appears that as long as Pringles incorporate the “gustatory qualities” of Prosecco, then the essential characteristics criteria are met and the packaging would not be infringing the PDO in issue.

It is only the packaging that does not include the amount of PDO in its ingredients or trade name that could be a problem. This violates the EC guidelines. This could be a problem, but it would likely not be difficult for Pringles.

Pringles, despite the glorious show put on by Italian politicians to protest the alleged “identity thievery” of Prosecco, in some cases may be using a protected trademark in accordance with the EU case law and the regulations governing the commercial use.

Crunch time

Pringles prosecco-flavored crisps should be legal according to EU guidelines. Kellogg

Pringles stated in a press release that the prosecco-flavored and pink peppercorn-flavored crispy snacks were produced as part of a limited edition holiday collection at the end of 2018. The packages that are still available on the market appear to be the last of the restricted stock.

Pringles said in the same statement that it has no plans to produce the festive version.

It is unlikely that this case will reach EU courts. It is doubtful that the case will be the only one of its kind, as Italian politicians have promised to continue their crusade in order to stop what they consider violations of PDO. Food and drink producers, especially during the holiday season, are eager to add “deluxe ingredients” – some of which are PDOs — to their festive products. This is the perfect recipe for another dispute disputing the usage of protected geographic names.