WWW
--------------------- Opiniones e información sobre temas de interés para el consumidor ----------------------
10/12/2014
SEVILLA: 17 de diciembre de 2014 - JORNADA “El mercado interior a la luz del Tratado de Lisboa”
PROGRAMA
.
Presentación: Prof. Dr.
Antonio Lazari, Profesor Contratado Doctor de Derecho Internacional Público de la Universidad Pablo de
Olavide, de Sevilla
MESA REDONDA Nº 1
.
.
Moderadora: Profa. Dra. Dña. Lucía Millán Moro, Catedrática de
Derecho Internacional Público de la Universidad Pablo de Olavide, de Sevilla –
Cátedra Jean Monnet de Derecho de la UE:
:
:
“Armonización de legislaciones y
Mercado Interior”
.
.
Prof. Dr. Jacques Ziller, Catedrático de Derecho Internacional
Público
.
.
Prof. Dr. Manuel López Escudero, Catedrático de Derecho
Internacional Público de la
Universidad de Granada – Director Ejecutivo de la Revista de
Derecho Comunitario Europeo
.
.
“Mercado interior, Medio ambiente y
Energía”
.
.
Prof. Dr. Antonio
Lazari, Profesor Contratado Doctor de Derecho Internacional
Público de la Universidad
Pablo de Olavide, de Sevilla
.
.
“El Mercado
Interior y la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia sobre la Carta Europea”
.
SESIÓN VESPERTINA: 17.30 H. –
SALÓN DE GRADOS DEL EDIFICIO Nº 7
.
MESA REDONDA Nº 2
.
.
Moderador: Prof. Dr. José Manuel Cortés Martín, Profesor Titular de
Derecho Internacional Público de la Universidad Pablo de Olavide, de Sevilla – Profesor
Jean Monnet de Derecho e
Instituciones de la Unión Europea:
:
:
“Evolución jurisprudencial de la
propiedad industrial como excepción a la libre circulación de mercancías”
.
.
Prof. José Manuel Sobrino Heredia, Catedrático de Derecho
Internacional Público de la
Universidad de A Coruña:
:
:
“La Política Pesquera Común y su
peculiar situación en el Mercado Interior de la UE”
.
.
Sr. D. Luis González Vaqué, Presidente del China-European Union Food Law
Working Party – Antiguo Director de la Unidad Libre circulación de
mercancías de la DG Mercado Interior de la Comisión Europea
.
.
“Evlución del Mercado Interior: Del
licor de Cassis al Bourbon whiskey”
.
..
Programa completo y formulario de inscripción: https://app.box.com/s/umkn37ujxi3fzwltk2sq
o
ww
09/12/2014
✔ Comisión Europea -The Food and Veterinary Office: Audit number 2014-7050 - España
.
Título: Animal
health - approved bodies - Annex C of Dir. 92/65/EEC
.
Audit period Mar 2014
.
Published 8/12/2014
.
.
- Competent Authority
comments on the draft report: http://ec.europa.eu/food/fvo/act_getPDFannx.cfm?ANX_ID=7878
.
- Competent Authority
response to the report recommendations: http://ec.europa.eu/food/fvo/act_getPDFannx.cfm?ANX_ID=7877
WW
25/11/2014
From agricultural to food law
● Vicente Rodríguez Fuentes et al., “From agricultural to food law”. Wageningen
Academic Publishers (2014) 192 pp.
.
Summary
.
The differences between agricultural law and food law are becoming
progressively blurred. This is only natural because both intend to control that
food products placed in the market are safe and respond to a certain standard
of quality. In their present form, both are relatively new legal disciplines,
evolving and expanding very rapidly and a great number of new and
transcendental regulations (and an increasing number of compulsory private
rules) are being enacted to respond to new realities.
.
One of these new realities is the legal protection of quality in food.
Once almost exclusively applied to a limited number of traditional well-known
products and now extended to many products covered by designations of origin or
geographical indications. Another area is food safety, a major concern of the
legislator. Food alerts, recalls and withdrawals have been carefully regulated
to guarantee a rapid and efficient reaction, but these legal mechanisms appear
to be less well-designed when dealing with the unwanted consequences of
unjustified alerts. A third topic is food prices and trading conditions, an
area that cannot always be completely left to unregulated market-forces due to
the special nature of the product involved.
.
The above issues are analysed by several experts from different legal
backgrounds and countries, a varied approach adequate to the hybrid nature of
food law.
.
See: http://www.wageningenacademic.com/Default.asp?pageid=58&docid=16&artdetail=EIFL-10&webgroupfilter=&
.
Download
table of contents of the book 'From agricultural to food law' (PDF file): http://www.wageningenacademic.com/_clientfiles/TOC/EIFL-10.pdf
www
www
19/11/2014
FCC Forum December 2014: USP Guidance on Food Fraud Mitigation
The USP Expert Panel on Food
Ingredients Intentional Adulterants (formed at the request of the Food
Ingredients Expert Committee) proposes this new Appendix to the Food
Chemicals Codex to elaborate guidance frameworks and tools to assist users
in the development of preventive management systems for food fraud.
.
The first guidance proposed for
addition to this Appendix, A. General Guidance for Food Ingredients,
guides users in how to develop and implement a preventive system specifically
for adulteration of food ingredients. It provides a qualitative, step-by-step
and structured approach to characterize food fraud vulnerabilities and guidance
on how to develop mitigation strategies. This guidance framework is generally
applicable to any food ingredient, and is intended to guide users toward the
development of their own fraud management system that prioritizes and focuses
mitigation resources towards ingredients that not only carry the most
vulnerability but also have the potential for the most detrimental consequences
when fraud occurs. It is intended to be adaptable to individual operating
environments that may have varying enterprise risk tolerance for food fraud,
and access to different types of fraud mitigation resources. It is intended to
be applicable to any user responsible for ensuring the safety and integrity of
food ingredients, including companies purchasing food ingredients, regulatory
authorities, along with auditors and food safety management scheme owners.
.
The approach proposed in A.
General Guidance for Food Ingredients is divided into four major steps. The
first three steps are aimed at characterizing the overall fraud vulnerabilities
of an ingredient by assessing factors contributing to fraud occurrence and the
potential impacts when fraud does occur,
including both public health and economic consequences. The last step provides
guidance on how to use information from the first three steps to develop a
mitigation strategy. Stakeholders are encouraged to evaluate the effectiveness
of this tool and provide comments and feedback to Jeff Moore, Ph.D., Senior
Scientific Liaison at JM@usp.org.
.
Additional, similar guidance
sections that tailor this general approach to specific ingredient categories
such as milk-based food ingredients are planned as future additions to this
Appendix. Stakeholders interested in contributing to additional guidance categories
in this area can contact Jeff Moore, Ph.D., Senior Scientific Liaison at JM@usp.org.
.
This proposal is targeted for
publication in the Third Supplement to FCC 9.
.
Comment deadline: March 31, 2015
.
LINK: http://www.usp.org/sites/default/files/usp_pdf/EN/fcc/Notices/guidance_on_food_fraud_mitigation.pdf
18/11/2014
Oportunidades para la exportación de alimentos a China
China se ha convertido en uno de los mercados de referencia para el
sector alimentario a nivel mundial. Y para España constituye una gran
oportunidad para aumentar sus exportaciones
Luis González Vaqué
Presidente de China-European Union Food Law
Working Party
El formidable crecimiento
económico experimentado por China en los últimos 20 años ha incrementado
notablemente el poder adquisitivo de centenares de millones de consumidores.
Según una estadística recientemente publicada, una empleada de hogar que en el año
2008 cobraba 8 RMB (renmibi) por hora, hoy en día gana 20. Se calcula que la
renta disponible de la población aumenta cada año un promedio del 10 por
ciento.
Nos referimos a un fenómeno
que todavía se está produciendo y que con toda probabilidad se prolongará a
corto y medio plazo, por supuesto, con sus fluctuaciones, pues la economía es
aún más variable y cambiante cuando los países desarrollados se hallan inmersos
en una crisis cuyo final no acaba de llegar. La consecuencia de este sostenido crecimiento
es la mejora del nivel de vida de sectores muy amplios de la población china,
lo que a su vez conlleva un incremento cuantitativo y cualitativo del consumo
alimentario.
Centenares de millones de
personas pueden satisfacer hoy en día su necesidad de alimentos en una medida
mucho mayor respecto al pasado: si en 1960 un ciudadano chino disponía -de
media- de 1.700 kcal al día, la cifra en 2009 se elevaba ya a un promedio de
3.036. Un desarrollo de tales proporciones constituye, sin duda alguna, una
gran oportunidad de comerciar y, de hecho, China se ha convertido en uno de los
mercados de referencia para el sector alimentario a nivel mundial. Y para España
constituye una gran oportunidad para aumentar sus exportaciones.
Es cierto que son ya muchas
las empresas alimentarias de nuestro país que han encontrado en ese inmenso
mercado una salida airosa para sus excedentes de producción. En efecto, en líneas
generales podemos afirmar que España está entre los primeros siete países
exportadores de productos que calificaríamos de representativos -en particular,
pasta, vino, aceite, productos de la acuicultura, cítricos, embutidos y queso-.
En definitiva, aunque el volumen de las exportaciones españolas no sea todavía
en términos absolutos muy elevado,
cada año asistimos a una
mejora constante y significativa, y, sobre todo, hemos de subrayar que los
productos españoles gozan de una excelente reputación.
Sigue en: http://diario.eleconomista.es/i/417273?token=
15/11/2014
Question for written answer E-004785/14 to the Commission - Gilles Pargneaux: Labelling not in line with provisions on genetically modified organisms (GMO)
Question for written answer E-004785/14 to the Commission - Gilles Pargneaux (S&D)(15 April 2014)
.
Subject: Labelling not in line with provisions on genetically modified organisms (GMO)
.
In a report on its 2012 animal feed inspection programme, France's Competition, Consumer Protection and Anti-Fraud Directorate-General reveals that, in recent years, close to 10% of animal feed has not been labelled in line with GMO provisions..
Is the Commission aware of that report?
.
If so, what does it intend to do to combat such fraudulent practices?
.
.
Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission (17 June 2014)
.
The EU legislation, and particularly Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003(1) on genetically modified food and feed, foresees compulsory labelling requirements for those food and feed products which contain, consist or are produced from GMOs which have been authorised in accordance with the relevant procedure established by the regulation, with the exception of a presence below 0,9% and technically unavoidable.
.
The control and enforcement of EU labelling requirements is the responsibility of Member States, as referred to in Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 on food and feed controls(2)
.
Following the question raised by the Honourable Member as regards the report issued by France's Competition, Consumer Protection and Anti-Fraud Directorate-General on its 2012 inspection programme on GMO labelling on animal feed, the Commission services have asked the French authorities to supply a copy of this report. It appears from this report that non-compliances with labelling requirement are not necessarily intentional and thus be assimilated to fraudulent practices. National administrative or jurisdictional actions, as the case may be, are engaged in the case of repeated incompliance or of refusal by the operator to proceed to the improvements required.
|
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)