Provisional text
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Eighth Chamber)
9 October 2025 (*)
( Reference for a preliminary ruling – Food safety – Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 – Provision of food information to consumers – Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/128 – Food for special medical purposes – Specific information requirements – Mandatory nutrition declaration – Article 5(2)(g) – Additional mandatory particulars – Article 6(2) – Prohibition of the repetition on the labelling of information contained in the mandatory nutrition declaration )
In Case C‑315/24,
REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen (Supreme Administrative Court, Sweden), made by decision of 25 April 2024, received at the Court on 29 April 2024, in the proceedings
Nestlé Sverige AB
v
Miljönämnden i Helsingborgs kommun,
THE COURT (Eighth Chamber),
composed of O. Spineanu-Matei, President of the Chamber, S. Rodin, and N. Fenger (Rapporteur), Judges,
Advocate General: R. Norkus,
Registrar: C. Strömholm, Administrator,
having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 12 February 2025,
after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:
– Nestlé Sverige AB, by F. Sjövall and J. Träsk, advokater, and K. Lewandowska, associate,
– Miljönämnden i Helsingborgs kommun, F. Lund Rydingsvärd, I. Mideljung and A. Wikhäll,
– the Czech Government, by S. Šindelková, M. Smolek and J. Vláčil, acting as Agents,
– the European Commission, by C. Faroghi, I. Galindo Martín and B. Rous Demiri, acting as Agents,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 8 May 2025,
gives the following
Judgment
1 The request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Articles 5(2)(g) and 6(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/128 of 25 September 2015 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 609/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the specific compositional and information requirements for food for special medical purposes (OJ 2016 L 25, p. 30).
2 The request has been made in proceedings between Nestlé Sverige AB (‘Nestlé’), a company incorporated under Swedish law, and the Miljönämnden i Helsingborgs kommun (Environmental Committee of the Municipality of Helsingborg, Sweden; ‘the Environment Committee’) concerning the latter’s decision to require Nestlé to remove certain information from the packaging of food for special medical purposes marketed by that company.
Legal context
Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011
3 Recital 41 of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87/250/EEC, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002/67/EC and 2008/5/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004 (OJ 2011 L 304, p. 18) is drafted as follows:
‘To appeal to the average consumer and to serve the informative purpose for which it is introduced, and given the current level of knowledge on the subject of nutrition, the nutrition information provided should be simple and easily understood. To have the nutrition information partly in the principal field of vision, commonly known as the “front of pack”, and partly on another side on the pack, for instance the “back of pack”, might confuse consumers. Therefore, the nutrition declaration should be in the same field of vision. In addition, on a voluntary basis, the most important elements of the nutrition information may be repeated in the principal field of vision, in order to help consumers to easily see the essential nutrition information when purchasing foods. A free choice as to the information that could be repeated might confuse consumers. Therefore it is necessary to clarify which information may be repeated.’
4 Article 9 of the regulation, headed ‘List of mandatory particulars’, provides, in paragraph 1 thereof, as follows:
‘In accordance with Articles 10 to 35 and subject to the exceptions contained in this Chapter, indication of the following particulars shall be mandatory:
…
(l) a nutrition declaration.’
5 Article 30 of that regulation, which relates to the content of the nutrition declaration referred to in Article 9(1)(l) thereof, provides, in paragraphs 1 and 3:
‘1. The mandatory nutrition declaration shall include the following:
(a) energy value; and
(b) the amounts of fat, saturates, carbohydrate, sugars, protein and salt.
…
3. Where the labelling of a prepacked food provides the mandatory nutrition declaration referred to in paragraph 1, the following information may be repeated thereon:
(a) the energy value; or
(b) the energy value together with the amounts of fat, saturates, sugars, and salt.’
6 Under the heading ‘Expression per 100 g or per 100 ml’, Article 32 of that regulation provides, in paragraph 2:
‘The energy value and the amount of nutrients referred to in Article 30(1) to (5) shall be expressed per 100 g or per 100 ml.’
7 The wording of Article 33 of Regulation No 1169/2011 is as follows:
‘1. In the following cases, the energy value and the amounts of nutrients referred to in Article 30(1) to (5) may be expressed per portion and/or per consumption unit, easily recognisable by the consumer, provided that the portion or the unit used is quantified on the label and that the number of portions or units contained in the package is stated:
(a) in addition to the form of expression per 100 g or per 100 ml referred to in Article 32(2);
…
2. By way of derogation from Article 32(2), in the cases referred to in point (b) of Article 30(3) the amount of nutrients and/or the percentage of the reference intakes set out in Part B of Annex XIII may be expressed on the basis of per portion or per consumption unit alone.
When the amounts of nutrients are expressed on the basis of per portion or per consumption unit alone in accordance with the first subparagraph, the energy value shall be expressed per 100 g or per 100 ml and on the basis of per portion or per consumption unit.
…
4. The portion or unit used shall be indicated in close proximity to the nutrition declaration.
…’
Regulation (EU) No 609/2013
8 Recitals 15, 24 and 26 of Regulation (EU) No 609/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on food intended for infants and young children, food for special medical purposes, and total diet replacement for weight control and repealing Council Directive 92/52/EEC, Commission Directives 96/8/EC, 1999/21/EC, 2006/125/EC and 2006/141/EC, Directive 2009/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Regulations (EC) No 41/2009 and (EC) No 953/2009 (OJ 2013 L 181, p. 35) state as follows:
‘(15) A limited number of categories of food constitute a partial or the sole source of nourishment for certain population groups. Such categories of food are vital for the management of certain conditions and/or are essential to satisfy the nutritional requirements of certain clearly identified vulnerable population groups. Those categories of food include … food for special medical purposes. …
…
(24) Regulation [No 1169/2011] lays down general labelling requirements. Those labelling requirements should, as a general rule, apply to the categories of food covered by this Regulation. However, this Regulation should also provide for additional requirements to, or derogations from, Regulation [No 1169/2011], where necessary, in order to meet the specific objectives of this Regulation.
…
(26) In the interest of protecting vulnerable consumers, labelling requirements should ensure accurate product identification for consumers. …’
9 Article 2(2)(g) of that regulation provides as follows:
‘The following definitions shall … apply:
…
(g) “food for special medical purposes” means food specially processed or formulated and intended for the dietary management of patients, including infants, to be used under medical supervision; it is intended for the exclusive or partial feeding of patients with a limited, impaired or disturbed capacity to take, digest, absorb, metabolise or excrete ordinary food or certain nutrients contained therein, or metabolites, or with other medically determined nutrient requirements, whose dietary management cannot be achieved by modification of the normal diet alone;’
10 Article 9(5) of that regulation provides:
‘The labelling, presentation and advertising of food referred to in Article 1(1) shall provide information for the appropriate use of such food, and shall not mislead, or attribute to such food the property of preventing, treating or curing a human disease, or imply such properties.’
Delegated Regulation 2016/128
11 Recitals 13 to 17 of Regulation 2016/128 state:
‘(13) Food for special medical purposes has to comply with Regulation [No 1169/2011]. In order to take account of the specific nature of food for special medical purposes, this Regulation should lay down additions and exceptions to those general rules, where appropriate.
(14) Providing all information that is necessary to ensure the appropriate use of food for special medical purposes should be mandatory for this type of food. That information should include information on the properties and characteristics in relation to, among others, the special processing and formulation, nutritional composition and rationale of use of the product that make it useful for its specific intended purpose. Such information should not be considered as nutrition and health claims within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council [of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods (OJ 2006 L 404, p. 9)].
(15) The nutrition declaration for food for special medical purposes is essential in order to guarantee its appropriate use, both for patients consuming that food and for health care professionals who recommend its consumption. For that reason and in order to provide more complete information to patients and healthcare professionals, the nutrition declaration should include more particulars than those required by [Regulation No 1169/2011]. …
(16) Consumers of food for special medical purposes have different nutritional needs than the normal population. The expression of nutrition information on the energy value and the amount of nutrients of food for special medical purposes as a percentage of daily reference intake values set out in [Regulation No 1169/2011] would mislead consumers and should therefore not be allowed.
(17) The use of nutrition and health claims authorised under [Regulation No 1924/2006] to promote food for special medical purposes would not be appropriate, since consumers of such products are patients suffering from a disease, disorder or condition and are, therefore, not part of the general healthy population. In addition, food for special medical purposes is to be used under medical supervision and its consumption should not be promoted through the use of nutrition and health claims directly targeting consumers. For those reasons, the use of nutrition and health claims should not be allowed for food for special medical purposes.’
12 Article 5(1) and (2) of that delegated regulation provides:
‘1. Unless otherwise provided in this Regulation, food for special medical purposes shall comply with [Regulation No 1169/2011].
2. In addition to the mandatory particulars listed in Article 9(1) of [Regulation No 1169/2011], the following shall be additional mandatory particulars for food for special medical purposes:
(a) a statement that the product must be used under medical supervision;
…
(c) a statement that the product is intended for a specific age group, as appropriate;
…
(f) where appropriate, a statement concerning adequate precautions and contra-indications;
(g) a description of the properties and/or characteristics that make the product useful in relation to the disease, disorder or medical condition for the dietary management of which the product is intended, in particular, as the case may be, relating to the special processing and formulation, the nutrients which have been increased, reduced, eliminated or otherwise modified and the rationale of the use of the product;
…’
13 Under the heading ‘Specific requirements on the nutrition declaration’, Article 6 of that delegated regulation provides, in paragraph 2, as follows:
‘By way of derogation from Article 30(3) of [Regulation No 1169/2011], the information included in the mandatory nutrition declaration for food for special medical purposes shall not be repeated on the labelling.’
14 Article 7 of that delegated regulation reads as follows:
‘Nutrition and health claims shall not be made on food for special medical purposes.’
The dispute in the main proceedings and the questions referred for a preliminary ruling
15 The applicant, Nestlé, is a food business which markets a variety of products as food for special medical purposes (‘the products concerned’).
16 As is apparent from the order for reference, on the front of the packaging of the products concerned there are particulars relating to the energy value and the amount of various nutrients that they contain, such as fat, protein and dietary fibre, expressed not per 100 g or per 100 ml, but per portion or per consumption unit (‘the particulars at issue’).
17 The Environment Committee required Nestlé to remove the particulars at issue on the ground that they are in breach of Article 6(2) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 in that they constitute a repetition of the particulars that already appear in the mandatory nutrition declaration, as provided for in Article 30(1) of Regulation No 1169/2011, and which are to be expressed, pursuant to Article 32(2) of that regulation, per 100 g or per 100 ml.
18 After unsuccessfully attempting to have that decision reviewed, Nestlé brought an action before the Förvaltningsrätten i Malmö (Administrative Court, Malmö, Sweden) seeking to have that decision annulled. In that action, Nestlé argued that the particulars at issue did not constitute a repetition of particulars included in the mandatory nutrition declaration, but should be regarded as particulars that supplement that declaration, which are consistent with Article 5(2)(g) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128.
19 That action was dismissed on the ground that, even though the particulars at issue were expressed per portion or per consumption unit rather than per 100 g or per 100 ml, they nevertheless constituted a repetition of particulars in the mandatory nutrition declaration, which is prohibited by Article 6(2) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128.
20 After failing in its appeal before the Kammarrätten i Göteborg (Administrative Court of Appeal, Gothenburg, Sweden), which also held that the particulars at issue did not fall within the scope of Article 5(2)(g) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 but constituted a repetition of particulars included in the mandatory nutrition declaration, Nestlé brought an appeal on a point of law before the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen (Supreme Administrative Court, Sweden), which is the referring court.
21 In order to determine whether the labelling of the products concerned complies with Delegated Regulation 2016/128, the referring court asks whether the particulars at issue constitute a supplementary description of the properties and/or characteristics of those products, within the meaning of Article 5(2)(g) of that delegated regulation, or an unauthorised repetition of the particulars included in the mandatory nutrition declaration, which would then be prohibited by Article 6(2) of that delegated regulation.
22 It is in those circumstances that the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen (Supreme Administrative Court) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:
‘(1) Can information regarding a product’s energy value and the amounts of different nutrients it contains, which is provided elsewhere than in the nutrition declaration, constitute an additional description of the product’s properties and characteristics, as referred to in Article 5(2)(g) of [Delegated Regulation 2016/128]?
(2) If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, does Article 6(2) [of that delegated regulation], which prohibits the repetition on the labelling of the information included in the mandatory nutrition declaration, preclude the indication, in a description under Article 5(2)(g) [of that delegated regulation], of information on the energy value and the amounts of different nutrients, if that information is expressed in a way other than per 100 g or per 100 ml?’
Consideration of the questions referred
23 By its questions, which it is appropriate to examine together, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 5(2)(g) and Article 6(2) of Delegated Regulation No 2016/128 must be interpreted as meaning that the statement of the energy value and the amount of various nutrients that a food for special medical purposes contains on the front of the packaging of that food, expressed per portion or per consumption unit, whereas the mandatory nutrition declaration on the back of that packaging contains a statement of those same elements per 100 g or per 100 ml, constitutes a ‘description of the properties and/or characteristics’ of a product, within the meaning of Article 5(2)(g) of that delegated regulation, or whether that statement is a repetition, which is prohibited by Article 6(2) of that delegated regulation.
24 As a preliminary point, as the Court has held previously, since food for special medical purposes is, first and foremost and despite its specificities, food, Delegated Regulation 2016/128, which supplements Regulation (EU) No 609/2013, must be understood, along with the latter regulation, in the light of other legislation applicable to foodstuffs (see, to that effect, judgment of 2 March 2023, Kwizda Pharma, C‑760/21, EU:C:2023:143, paragraph 59).
25 As reflected in recital 24 of Regulation No 609/2013, the labelling requirements laid down in Regulation No 1169/2011 apply, as a general rule, to the categories of foodstuffs covered by the former regulation. In addition, Delegated Regulation 2016/128 refers explicitly and on numerous occasions to Regulation No 1169/2011. In particular, it follows from Article 5(1) of that delegated regulation that, in principle, food for special medical purposes must comply with Regulation No 1169/2011 as regards food information. Moreover, as regards the specific requirements for the nutrition declaration, Article 6 of that delegated regulation relies heavily on the requirements of that regulation and explicitly indicates the cases in which it is appropriate to deviate from its provisions (see, to that effect, judgment of 2 March 2023, Kwizda Pharma, C‑760/21, EU:C:2023:143, paragraphs 60 and 61).
26 Thus, in so far as food for special medical purposes is, first and foremost and despite its specificities, food, Article 5(2)(g) and Article 6(2) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128, to which the referring court’s queries relate, must be understood in the light of Regulation No 1169/2011 and Regulation No 609/2013.
27 Turning, in the first place, to Article 5(2)(g) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128, under that provision, in addition to the mandatory particulars listed in Article 9(1) of Regulation No 1169/2011, food for special medical purposes is to bear additional mandatory particulars such as, in particular, a description of the properties and/or characteristics that make the product useful in relation to the disease, disorder or medical condition for the dietary management of which the product is intended, in particular, as the case may be, relating to the special processing and formulation, the nutrients which have been increased, reduced, eliminated or otherwise modified, and the rationale of the use of the product.
28 Moreover, Article 9(1)(l) of Regulation No 1169/2011 – to which Article 5(2)(g) of Delegated Regulation No 2016/128 refers – provides that one of the indications which must appear on foods is a ‘nutrition declaration’.
29 According to Article 30(1) of Regulation No 1169/2011, which concerns the content of a mandatory nutrition declaration, that declaration is to include the energy value and, in particular, the amount of certain nutrients.
30 Under Article 32(2) of that regulation, the energy value and the amounts of nutrients referred to in the mandatory nutrition declaration are to be expressed per 100 g or per 100 ml, while Article 33 of that regulation governs the cases in which those elements may be expressed per portion and/or per consumption unit.
31 In the present case, it is apparent from the request for a preliminary ruling that the energy value and the amount of various nutrients that appear in the nutrition declaration of the products at issue are expressed, on the back of the packaging for those products, per 100 g or per 100 ml, while those same particulars are expressed per portion or per consumption unit on the front of the packaging for those products.
32 Since it is apparent from the very wording of Article 5(2)(g) of Delegated Regulation No 2016/128 that that provision concerns mandatory particulars additional to those which must already appear under Article 9(1) of Regulation No 1169/2011, the energy value and the amount of various nutrients, which are constituent elements of the mandatory nutrition declaration, cannot constitute mandatory particulars under that provision and, at the same time, additional mandatory particulars within the meaning of Article 5(2) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128. The mandatory information provided for by the latter provision is to apply specifically to food for special medical purposes and is in addition to the mandatory information required by Regulation No 1169/2011.
33 Thus, the wording of Article 5(2)(g) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128, which refers to the mandatory indication of information other than that provided for in Article 9(1) of Regulation No 1169/2011, cannot be interpreted as meaning that particulars such as the particulars at issue come within the scope of Article 5(2)(g) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128.
34 Further, the wording of Article 5(2)(g) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 requires a ‘description’ of the properties and/or characteristics of a product. Although that provision does not list exhaustively the particulars that may have to be included in such a description, that provision states that it does cover, inter alia, the special processing and formulation of a product and its formula and the nutrients which have been increased, reduced, eliminated or otherwise modified and the rationale of the use of the product.
35 Therefore, it is apparent from a literal interpretation of Article 5(2)(g) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 that the ‘description of the properties and/or characteristics’, within the meaning of that provision, of a food for special medical purposes cannot refer to particulars that already appear – albeit expressed differently – in the mandatory nutrition declaration on the back of the packaging of the food in question and which the food business operator is merely repeating on the front of that packaging, where the latter particulars contain no description of the properties and/or characteristics of that food.
36 It is irrelevant in that regard that, as Nestlé has argued in support of its argument seeking to demonstrate that the particulars in question are useful, there are differences between the language versions of that provision.
37 Although in the French-language version of that provision there is no reference, in the description of the properties and/or characteristics, to the ‘usefulness’ of a product – unlike, for example, the versions in Swedish (de egenskaper och/eller kännetecken som gör produkten särskilt användbar), Spanish (propiedades o características que expliquen la utilidad del producto), Danish (egenskaber og/eller karakteristika, der gør produktet nyttigt), English (properties and/or characteristics that make the product useful) or Romanian (proprietăților și/sau a caracteristicilor care fac produsul util), in which that detail does appear – such a difference between language versions is not decisive in the present case, since, in any event, regardless of the language version, the wording of Article 5(2)(g) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 makes it necessary to include a description of the properties and/or characteristics of the product concerned, and not a mere indication of the same information as that which already appears in the mandatory nutrition declaration, but expressed in a different format.
38 In the second place, the referring court’s questions concern the possibility, as regards food for special medical purposes, of repeating particulars such as those at issue in the main proceedings in the light of the prohibition laid down in Article 6(2) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128, by way of derogation from Article 30(3) of Regulation No 1169/2011.
39 In that regard, it is true that, as regards food in general, Article 30(3) provides that it is permissible, in certain circumstances, to repeat certain particulars on the labelling of a prepacked food. Under that provision, where the labelling of a prepacked food provides the mandatory nutrition declaration, either the energy value or the energy value together with the amounts of fat, saturates, sugars and salt may be repeated there.
40 However, as regards food for special medical purposes, Article 6(2) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 clearly lays down a prohibition on repeating the information contained in the mandatory nutrition declaration on the labelling of those foods. Under that provision, by way of derogation from Article 30(3) of Regulation No 1169/2011, the information included in the mandatory nutrition declaration for food for special medical purposes is not to be repeated.
41 It follows that the EU legislature intended to prohibit the repetition, on the front of the packaging of a food for special medical purposes, of the energy value and the amount of various nutrients expressed per portion or per consumption unit, where they are the same particulars as those set out in the mandatory nutrition declaration that appears on the back of that packaging, albeit expressed per 100 g or per 100 ml.
42 That is precisely the case in the present instance for the particulars at issue, in so far as they are particulars which do indeed come within the scope of the mandatory nutrition declaration under Article 30(1) of Regulation No 1169/2011 in terms of their nature and without the form in which they are expressed being decisive.
43 As the Advocate General observed in point 57 of his Opinion, the prohibition, set out in Article 6(2) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128, and the obligation, under Article 5(2)(g) thereof, respectively to provide certain particulars on the labelling of food for special medical purposes cannot change depending on the various forms in which that information is expressed, since it still relates to the same substance.
44 The literal interpretation of Article 5(2)(g) and Article 6(2) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 is borne out by the context of those provisions and by the purpose of both that delegated regulation and Regulation No 609/2013.
45 Turning, first, to that context, all of the particulars mentioned in Article 5 of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 – in particular those relating to the use of foods for special medical purposes under medical supervision, the specific age group for which such food is intended, and adequate precautions and contra-indications – go beyond the nutritional content of the food concerned and are intended to be in addition to that information.
46 Further, in view of those specific requirements applicable to food for special medical purposes – namely, as is apparent, in essence, from the definition in Article 2(2)(g) of Regulation No 609/2013, of food that has been specially processed with a view to the dietary management of certain patients and which is to be used under medical supervision, and, as is reflected in recital 17 of Delegated Regulation 2016/128, which is intended to meet the specific nutritional requirements arising from a given disease, disorder or medical condition – it must be held that the information necessary for the proper use of those foods cannot be limited to a mere repetition of the particulars that already exist in the mandatory nutrition declaration, but must set out the properties and/or characteristics of those foods.
47 Turning, second, to the purpose of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 and Regulation No 609/2013, it is apparent from recital 13 of the first regulation and from recitals 15 and 26 of the second regulation that, by laying down specific labelling requirements for certain foods, the EU legislature wished to establish a high level of protection for vulnerable consumers in order to enable them to ensure accurate identification of the products which constitute their partial or sole source of nourishment. In addition, Article 9(5) of Regulation No 609/2013 states that the labelling, presentation and advertising of food for special medical purposes must not be misleading.
48 As the European Commission pointed out in its written observations, indicating only certain information already contained in the mandatory nutrition declaration could misrepresent the general composition of a food product and thus mislead consumers. The objective pursued by the EU legislature in authorising, in Article 30(3) of Regulation No 1169/2011, the repetition of certain nutrition information, namely to help consumers easily access the most important nutrition information when purchasing food products, is not relevant to food for special medical purposes, given that those products are intended to be consumed under the supervision of healthcare professionals.
49 Moreover, Article 7 of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 prohibits food for special medical purposes from being the subject of nutrition and health claims. In that regard, as is reflected in recital 17 of that regulation, since consumers of food for special medical purposes are patients suffering from a particular disease, disorder or condition and are, therefore, not part of the general healthy population, it is a question of preventing those foods from being promoted directly to consumers with a view to stimulating the sale of those products, since those foods are, moreover, adapted for use under the supervision of healthcare professionals.
50 It follows that, in view of the specific nature of those foods, that interpretation of Article 5(2)(g) and Article 6(2) of Delegated Regulation 2016/128 is also consistent with the objective pursued both by that delegated regulation and by Regulation No 609/2013.
51 In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the questions raised is that Article 5(2)(g) and Article 6(2) of Delegated Regulation No 2016/128 must be interpreted as meaning that the indication of the energy value and the amount of various nutrients, expressed per portion or per consumption unit, on the front of the packaging of food for special medical purposes, whereas the mandatory nutrition declaration on the back of that packaging contains a statement of those same elements per 100 g or per 100 ml, does not constitute a ‘description of the properties and/or characteristics’ of a product, within the meaning of Article 5(2)(g) of that delegated regulation, but is a repetition of the information in that mandatory nutrition declaration, which is prohibited by Article 6(2) of that delegated regulation.
Costs
52 Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the referring court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable.
On those grounds, the Court (Eighth Chamber) hereby rules:
Article 5(2)(g) and Article 6(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/128 of 25 September 2015 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 609/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the specific compositional and information requirements for food for special medical purposes
must be interpreted as meaning that the indication of the energy value and the amount of various nutrients, expressed per portion or per consumption unit, on the front of the packaging of food for special medical purposes, whereas the mandatory nutrition declaration on the back of that packaging contains a statement of those same elements per 100 g or per 100 ml, does not constitute a ‘description of the properties and/or characteristics’ of a product, within the meaning of Article 5(2)(g) of that delegated regulation, but is a repetition of the information in that mandatory nutrition declaration, which is prohibited by Article 6(2) of that delegated regulation.
[Signatures]