No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2017
1 Formerly known as ‘guideline daily amounts’ or GDAs.
2 Depending on their content per 100g.
3 UK Department of Health, et al., “Guide to creating a front of pack (FoP) nutrition label for pre-packed products sold through retail outlets”, available on the Internet at <https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/300886/2902158_FoP_Nutrition_2014.pdf> (last accessed on 10 November 2014).
4 Annie-Rose Harrison-Dunn, “UK’s traffic light label is ‘negative’, says Commission”, available on the Internet at <http://www.foodnavigator.com/Legislation/Nordic-keyhole-vs.-UK-s-traffic-light-nutrition-label> (last accessed on 10 November 2014).
5 Summary report of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health held in Brussels on 4 October 2013 (Section General Food Law), available on the Internet at <http://ec.europa.eu/food/committees/regulatory/scfcah/general_food/docs/sum_04102013_en.pdf> (last accessed on 10 November 2014).
6 Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision of food information to consumers, OJ 2011 L 304/18.
7 Parliamentary question E-010157-13, tabled by MEP Axel Voss. Subsequent parliamentary questions have been responded in a more ‘cautious’ manner. See, for example, parliamentary question E-002852/2014, where the Commission indicated to be “vigilant that this system does not create barriers to trade”.
8 Department of Health, et al., supra note 3.
9 Carreño, Ignacio, “The European Commission Considers the UK Traffic Light Nutrition-Labelling Scheme as Voluntary Nutritional Information and Not as a ‘Non-Beneficial’ Nutrition Claim”, 1 European Journal of Risk Regulation 2014, pp. 61 et sqq., at 64CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
10 Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on nutrition and health claims made on foods, OJ 2006 L 404/9.
11 Carreño, see supra note 9.
12 See generally, Paoli, Antonio, et al., “Beyond weight loss: a review of the therapeutic uses of very-low-carbohydrate (ketogenic) diets”, 67 European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2013), pp. 789 et sqq CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
13 The purpose of the reasoned opinion is to set out the Commission’s position on the infringement and to determine the subject matter of any action, requesting the EU Member State to comply within a given time limit. The reasoned opinion must give a coherent and detailed statement, based on the letter of formal notice, of the reasons that have led it to conclude that the EU Member State concerned has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaties or secondary legislation.
14 Annie-Rose Harrison-Dunn, “France considers ‘traffic light’ labelling as UK MEP hits back at EU threat of court case”, available on the Internet at <http://www.foodnavigator.com/Legislation/France-considers-traffic-light-labelling-UK-EU-court-case> (last accessed 10 November 2014).
15 Caroline Scott-Thomas, “WHO calls for standardised nutrition labelling”, 28 October 2014, available on the Internet at <http://www.foodnavigator.com/Legislation/WHO-calls-for-standardised-nutrition-labelling> (last accessed 10 November 2014).