DESIGNATIONS OF ORIGIN WITHIN THE EU: LEGAL CHALLENGES 51 4. THE PRESERVATION OF THE COMMON MARKET IN DESIGNATIONS OF ORIGIN The devolution of powers regarding designations of origin is twofold, both facets being equally significant as far as the preservation of the common market is concerned. Firstly, the establishment of a European geographical designations system has entailed the replacement of national systems that associate the origin and the characteristics of products (4.1). Secondly, if a common market for Europe is to be achieved, the internal distribution of powers within member states must not stand in the way of said objective (4.2). 4.1. European and National Quality Systems for Origin-Labelled Products: Substitution or Coexistence There is a dilemma that has been coming up in European law regarding designations of origin since 1992. The disagreement lies in whether the institution of the European protection systems of designations was consistent with existing protectionist national systems. Doubts were raised as to whether the Europe-wide designations of origin that came into force in 1992 could stand alongside national systems that protect designations of the same nature as those in Europe. Indeed, those designations that registered as PDO or PGI when the European Register was set up were protected by the states, especially wine designations. Therefore, it is only natural that we assess how appropriate it is for two systems, national and European, to coexist and whether it is the latter that should prevail to exercise the protection powers over designations. Shortly after being issued on 7 May 1997, the Montagne judgement by the ECJ – also known as Pistre ruling –, Professor Jiménez Blanco asserted that it clarified matters over coexisting systems only partially as the controversy raged on in the case of those designations that, being covered by the Regulation, had not entered the register provided for therein. Blanco argued that, for them, “the most consistent step to take would be to leave unaltered the protection that domestic systems would afford”30. Botana Agra also opted for the coexistence31 after the 30 JIMÉNEZ BLANCO, P. (1997). “La protección de las denominaciones geográficas en el ámbito comunitario. Comentario a la sentencia del TJCE de 7 de mayo de 1997”, Diario La Ley, vol. 5. 31 According to BOTANA AGRA, M. J. (2001). op. cit., p. 176: “on the one hand, as far as the common protection is concerned, within the EU, the applicable system will have to be established by Regulation (CE) No 2081/92; on the other hand, within the member state where the designation of origin or geographical indication has national protection, those designations or indications may continue availing
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==