What changed

ORDINARY LEGISLATIVE procedure

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

FollowThe uprapporteur towelcomes the European Parliament legislative resolution on theCommission’s proposal for aaimed regulationat ofstrengthening the European Parliament andprotection of the Council on European Union geographical indications for wine, spirit drinks and agricultural products, and quality schemes for agricultural products, amending Regulations (EU) No 1308/2013, (EU) 2017/1001 and (EU) 2019/787 and repealing Regulation (EU) Noproducts 1151/2012(GIs).

1. Rapporteur: Paolo DE CASTRO (S&D / IT)

In 2022 the European Commission and its Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (DG AGRI) informally agreed to delegate tasks in the scrutiny and registration process of geographical indications (GIs) to the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), responsible for managing the EU trade mark and the registered Community design, an agency that is under the remit of the legal affairs committee.

2. Reference numbers: 2022/0089 (COD) / A9-0173/2023 / P9_TA(2024)0101

The JURI rapporteur for this opinion sees the upcoming revision of the GI system as an opportunity to clarify the role of the EUIPO vis-à-vis the DG AGRI and the system of agricultural GIs. Indeed, the Memorandum of Understanding between DG AGRI and the EUIPO was reached in a way rather unbeknown to the Parliament and its Members, not providing enough certainty as to which tasks had been covered, which had not, and to what extent and purpose.

3. Date of adoption of the resolution: 28 February 2024

We should strive for further legal clarity. The Commission proposal indeed advances in that direction, acknowledging the EUIPO’s assistance role, but leaves out still the details of such cooperation regarding delegated acts. The JURI rapporteur believes that such tasks should be clearly delineated and agreed, among co-legislators, directly in that particular regulation.

4. Legal basis: Articles 43(2) and 118(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

One notable exception to that approach is the use of GI registers which, he believes, should be tackled through a further delegated act that should include the creation of a new GI register, its maintenance, update and protection.

5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI)

On substance, hence, the JURI rapporteur sees a relevant role for the EUIPO in performing technical supporting tasks such as scrutinizing the application for registration, informing applicants in case of delay in the scrutiny process, seeking supplementary information from the applicant if necessary. Also in handling the publication of the single document in the Union registration, managing the opposition procedure or establishing and managing an alert system that would provide information about the availability of a geographical indication as a domain name.

6. Commission's position: accepts all amendments.

The more substantial aspect of GI registration, like the analysis of the products specification (cahier des charges), however, should remain within the DG AGRI. Union amendments should also remain under the responsibility of DG AGRI.

The JURI rapporteur believes that a certain level of coherence between the revised system for agricultural GIs and the proposed system for craft GIs should be aimed for.

Overall, the JURI rapporteur sees the collaboration between EUIPO and DG AGRI as positive and cost-efficient but he wishes to clarify that collaboration.

The JURI rapporteur also suggests an amendment related to the rights of the information of the applicants and the timeline the Commission must respect when handling their requests.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Legal Affairs calls on the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15

Or. en

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 39

Or. en

Justification

The JURI rapporteur believes that while the involvement of the EUIPO can be of benefit, it should not lead to delays and extra administrative layers. Also the JURI rapporteur believes that the EC should in any case remain responsible for the registration, including the product specification and union amendments.

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 39 a (new)

Or. en

Justification

The simplification of procedures for amending specifications will help to address administrative burden. This is important because amendments to specifications have a major impact on the adoption of production process adjustments.

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 39 b (new)

Or. en

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 56

Or. en

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – title

Or. en

Justification

EUIPO is already getting technical inputs from several Commission units with the geographical indication file to be pre-examined.

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 3

Or. en

Justification

In the AM 4 the JURI rapporteur proposes to entrust EUIPO with seeking supplementary information from the applicant. For the sake of efficiency, the JURI rapporteur would suggest to leave this part of the process for the EUIPO.

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 5

Or. en

Justification

The JURI rapporteur believes the new tasks transferred to the EUIPO should be set here, in this Regulation, by the co-legislators and not be left up to the Commission

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Or. en

Justification

The JURI rapporteur believes there is no reason to exempt the EUIPO from informing the applicant.

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1

Or. en

Justification

The notice of comment is not an opposition procedure and should therefore not be dealt with in the same article. A certain level of coherence between this report and Mrs Walsmann's on geographical indications for craft and industrial products is important.

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2

Or. en

Justification

The notice of comment is not an opposition procedure and should therefore not be dealt with in the same article.

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 9

Or. en

Justification

The notice of comment is not an opposition procedure and should therefore not be dealt with in the same article.

Amendment 16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 10

Or. en

Justification

The JURI rapporteur believes the new tasks transferred to the EUIPO should be set here, in this Regulation, by the co-legislators and not be left up to the Commission

Amendment 17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 10 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 a (new)

Or. en

Justification

It has to be clarified what the notice of comment procedure is, since this is not an opposition but corrective remarks in the registration procedure. A certain level of coherence between this draft opinion and Mrs Walsmann's draft report on geographical indications for craft and industrial products is important.

Amendment 19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 7

Or. en

Justification

The JURI rapporteur believes the new tasks transferred to the EUIPO should be set here, in this Regulation, by the co-legislators and not be left up to the Commission

Amendment 22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 2

Or. en

Justification

It is necessary to grant the same rights to third countries to meet WTO commitments.

Amendment 23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 5

Or. en

Justification

Recent events show that it would be useful to take into account geopolitical situations such as war to allow for temporary changes to specifications.

Amendment 24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 6

Or. en

Justification

The DG AGRI should remain responsible for the examination of EU amendments given the low administrative burden it represents and the high expertise DG AGRI has on this field.

Amendment 25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 9

Or. en

Amendment 26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 10

Or. en

Justification

The JURI rapporteur believes the new tasks transferred to the EUIPO should be set here, in this Regulation, by the co-legislators and not be left up to the Commission

Amendment 27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 10 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 28

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 5

Or. en

Justification

Looking at recent cancellation requests which have led to a privatisation of some GIs, it would be useful to introduce rules.

Amendment 29

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 6

Or. en

Justification

The JURI rapporteur believes the new tasks transferred to the EUIPO should be set here, in this Regulation, by the co-legislators and not be left up to the Commission

Amendment 30

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Or. en

Justification

GIs that are protected by bilateral or multilateral agreements should not be automatically included in the Union register.

Amendment 31

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31

Or. en

Justification

Merged with paragraph 35 in order to provide further clarity.

Amendment 32

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – title

Or. en

Justification

Consistency with the merger of Articles 31 and 35.

Amendment 33

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Or. en

Justification

Consistency with the merger of Articles 31 and 35.

Amendment 34

Proposal for a regulation

Article 46 – paragraph 1

Or. en

Justification

The JURI rapporteur believes the new tasks transferred to the EUIPO should be set here, in this Regulation, by the co-legislators and not be left up to the Commission

Amendment 35

Proposal for a regulation

Article 47 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Or. en

Amendment 36

Proposal for a regulation

Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)

Or. en

Justification

EUIPOs intervention will have to be assessed in terms of how it could reduce the duration of procedures.

Amendment 37

Proposal for a regulation

Article 47 – paragraph 2

Or. en

Justification

Co-legislators would be involved to, if necessary, expand the tasks of the EUIPO in the future.

Amendment 38

Proposal for a regulation

Article 82

Regulation (EU) 2017/1001

Article 151 – paragraph 1 – point f

Justification

EUIPO could be in charge of promotion of GIs, similarly as it is envisaged in the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on geographical indication protection for craft and industrial products (Art. 61).

Or. en