Commission v Germany (Beer purity)
A German law prohibiting the sale of beer made with additives or ingredients other than malted barley, hops, yeast and water under the name beer breached the free movement of goods.
Facts
Under the German beer purity law, the Reinheitsgebot, which dated back to 1516, only drinks brewed from malted barley, hops, yeast and water could be sold in Germany under the name Bier. Beer containing additives was also prohibited. Beers from other Member States, which were often brewed with other ingredients such as rice or maize, could not be sold as beer in Germany. The Commission brought infringement proceedings.
Legal principle
The Court of Justice held that the German law was contrary to the Treaty. The restriction on the use of the name beer could not be justified by consumer protection, because consumers could be informed of the ingredients by labelling, and it had the effect of crystallising given consumer habits so as to consolidate an advantage acquired by national industries. The absolute ban on additives was disproportionate, because Germany had not shown that the additives posed a risk to public health, and it allowed the same additives in other drinks. The judgment confirmed the approach in Cassis de Dijon.
Related cases on free movement of goods
- Commission v Denmark (Danish bottles) Case 302/86, [1988] ECR 4607
- Commission v France (Spanish strawberries) Case C-265/95, [1997] ECR I-6959
- Commission v Ireland (Buy Irish) Case 249/81, [1982] ECR 4005
- Commission v Italy (Art treasures) Case 7/68, [1968] ECR 423
- Commission v Italy (Motorcycle trailers) Case C-110/05, [2009] ECR I-519
- Conegate Ltd v HM Customs & Excise Case 121/85, [1986] ECR 1007
- Deutscher Apothekerverband eV v 0800 DocMorris NV Case C-322/01, [2003] ECR I-14887
- Keck and Mithouard Joined Cases C-267/91 and C-268/91, [1993] ECR I-6097
Studying EU Law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
