p.p1 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.

0px; font: 12.0px Arial; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000}p.p2 {margin: 0.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Arial; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 14.0px}p.

p3 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Arial; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 14.

0px}span.s1 {font-kerning: none}By the questions asked in the preliminary ruling, the national court sought to answer id the “bake-off” products fall under the same requirements as the product applicable to manufacturing and marketing procedure for traditional bread. The court began its legal foundation by examining the free movement of goods between Member States of the European Union which is a fundamental principle of the signed Treaty.

In other words, the “bake-off” licensing issue has a domino effect in the European legal system which could hinder the Treaty of the European Union if not properly addressed. The Member States could be vulnerable because the unregulated or unlicensed goods compete with the licensed goods cooperations hindering the said cooperations profit making potential. Additionally, the community health issue from the “bake-off” bread could theoretically create an outbreak, injuring or killing multiple people.A “bake off” method consists of quickly warming up frozen bread in an oven which is a form of processing food. The frozen bread allows for easier storage and transportation of the bread.

However, the bread is not fresh like a traditional bread making process would be. As a result, the “bake-off” bread can be of lower quality and runs into issues pertaining to microorganisms and the contamination of the food. A traditional bread making process includes mixing flour, salt and yeast. The mixture is then heated in a regulated, licensed oven which allows for consumer protection and a fresher quality of bread. The bread is made in a regulated bakery by bakers. Unlike the “bake-off” method, the traditional bread making companies adhere to all articles and laws.

Simply put, the “bake-off” companies were trying to cut corners by making a cheaper product, at a lower quality and tricking their customers into believing the bread was of equal quality. In light of this case, the Court clarified the measures of quantitative restrictions which would help the current case come to a close but would simultaneously stop similar future cases from going too high up into the court system.  The Court stated that Article 28 EC did not include national provisions restrictions or prohibiting certain selling arrangements as long as all relevant trader are operating within national territory and as long as the restrictions effect the all the people in the industry equally.

 The Court examined other regulatory issues pertaining to food and the production of food with the goal of consumer protection in mind. The main issues aroused here was the consumers believed they were purchasing fresh bread rather than the “bake-off” style bread. The bread the consumers were purchasing was not fresh and was altered.

However, the Court came to a consensus that the law does not protect consumers from being confused about freshly made bread and bread made in a “bake-off” style.  The Court did not make any laws about this issue. Legal Outcomes of the CaseIn fact, due to the matters of the case and the laws already in place but the European Union and its Member States, the Court used preexisting laws to close the case in a quick manner. No additional laws were passed by legislators about this issue because Article 28 EC was interrupted to already have the legal issue within its existing legislation.

 On the numerous grounds established during the hearings, the Court ruled that Article 28 EC is to be interrupted as precluding national legislation which makes sale of “bake-off” products subject to the same requirements as those applicable to full manufacturing and marketing procedure for traditional bread and bakery products. Due to the nature of this case and the evolving processed food markets, this case was relevant to many firms in future years. As more firms invented ways to make food cheaper and quicker, many tried to save money but avoiding licensing fees and regulations. However, under the ruling of the Court in joint cases 158/04 and 159/04 all the firms would be subject to the same authorities as traditional manufacturing firms. 

x

Hi!
I'm Gerard!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out