Introductory text

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs^f1, and in particular Article 52(3)(b) thereof,

Whereas:

In accordance with Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs^f2, Italy’s application to register the name ‘Salame Felino’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union ^f3.

Pursuant to Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, statements of objection substantiated under Article 7(3)(a), (c) and (d) of that Regulation were notified to the Commission by Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. In its letter of 27 September 2011 the Commission invited the interested parties to engage in appropriate consultations.

At the end of the appropriate consultation period Belgium and the Netherlands reached an agreement with Italy. Under that agreement the qualitative description of the raw materials was amended to include a reference to the classification set out in the carcass definition table contained in Annex V to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007^f4, the geographical limitation of slicing and packaging operations was removed and a number of minor textual amendments made.

No agreement was, however, reached between Germany and Italy during the appropriate consultation period.

Given that no agreement was reached between all the parties within a timeframe of six months, the Commission must adopt a decision.

Germany’s objection related to non-compliance with Article 5(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1898/2006^f5 concerning the origin of the raw materials. It should be noted that the registration application places no geographical restriction on such origins, as confirmed by the amendment proposed by Italy based on the agreement reached with Belgium and the Netherlands.

The objector also maintained that the requirement that ‘a specific quality, reputation or other characteristics [be] attributable to that geographical origin’ is not met. As Italy based its application for registration as a geographical indication on the reputation acquired by ‘Salame Felino’, the file followed this line of argument. The objector, it should be noted, neither disputes nor presents any argument casting doubt on that reputation. The conditions laid down in Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 have therefore been fulfilled.

As no evidence has been adduced in support of Germany’s third ground for objection, namely that the name proposed for registration is a generic name, the generic nature has by no means been established.

In its statement of objection and further to the appropriate consultations, Belgium cited Article 7(3)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, under which statements of objection are admissible if they ‘show that the registration of the name proposed would jeopardise […] the existence of products which have been legally on the market for at least five years preceding the date of the publication provided for in Article 6(2)’. A transitional period of up to five years may in this case be permitted where a statement of objection has been declared admissible on these grounds. Belgium’s statement of objection refers to the undertakings Reulen bvba and Salaisons Salamone SA and demonstrates that they produce and market a Felino-type salami.

In the light of the above, the name should therefore be registered, the amended single document published and a five-year transitional period introduced in favour of the above undertakings.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Protected Geographical Indications and Protected Designations of Origin,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: