Switzerland, Geneva 1-3 April, 2003
World Wine Trade Group Industry Statement on Regulation EC 753/02
Following on from the statement developed in Cape Town
in July 2002 , and strengthened in Mendoza on 5 December 2002, the industry
section of the World Wine Trade Group reiterates its concerns about
Regulation EC 753/2002.
Despite the deferral of the introduction of this Regulation by the European
Commission, the industry members of the WWTG retain fundamental concerns
about the current formulation of the regulation.
In the view of the industry group, the regulation is confusing and does
not meet its stated objective of simplifying labeling regulations into
a single Regulation.
In addition, a number of aspects of the regulation appear to be inconsistent
with World Trade Organisation rules and will provide significant impediments
to trade to importers into Europe. The WWTG also recognises that many
of these trade inconsistent measures are currently in EC regulation
and that the sustained opposition from the WWTG extends to these existing
regulations.
The WWTG would welcome the opportunity to work with the European Commission,
member states and industry in a cooperative manner to modify EC Regulation
753/2002 to ensure it is not trade restrictive while still ensuring free
and fair trade practices.
However, if the Regulation is not substantially amended, the industry
section of the WWTG will urge their governments to continue sustained
opposition to the introduction of this regulation in all possible fora.
See
Attachment: World Wine Trade Group Meeting
Cape Town, South Africa: July 2-3, 2002
WWTG Statement on the Multi-lateral Register for Wines and Spirits
Considering Article 18 of the Ministerial Statement at Doha, and the current discussions on the "multi-lateral system of notification and registration of geographical indications" under TRIPs article 23.4;
Recalling our statement in Toronto, Canada of December 19, 2001;
Reiterates, strongly, that in our view the multilateral register for wines and spirits:
1. should be based on existing legal frameworks for intellectual property rights;
2. should be voluntary; and
3. should be without binding legal effect
Accordingly supports the current proposal by Chile, the USA, Japan and
others on the register.