EU General Court rejects opposition to Irish Grass Fed Beef PGI
Jocelyn Bosse
EU General Court rejects opposition to Irish Grass Fed Beef PGI
Jocelyn Bosse Monday, April 20, 2026 - european commission, geographical indications, Ireland, Jocelyn Bosse, Northern Ireland
Last week, the EU General Court dismissed an opposition to the Irish Grass Fed Beef PGI in Case T-62/24. A group called the Independent Farmers Of Ireland (IFOI) opposed the Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) on the grounds that they were deprived of procedural rights to raise objection after the PGI application was substantially amended to extend the protected geographical area to Northern Ireland.
Background
Irish Grass Fed Beef refers to cattle that are born and raised on grass, finished, slaughtered, chilled and quartered on the island of Ireland. Grass-based agriculture is very important on the island of Ireland, sometimes nicknamed "the Emerald Isle" for its lush landscapes and grass growing potential. Irish Grass Fed Beef is known for its high eating quality.
Photo by George Kingsnorth via Pexels.
The process of EU recognition of the Irish Grass Fed Beef PGI was initiated by An Bord Bia (the Irish Food Board) in 2020. IFOI lodged an opposition during the national procedure, but it was dismissed. The PGI application was then published in the EU Official Journal, at which point the UK Government lodged an opposition.
The UK Government objected because the published application only covered farmers in the Republic of Ireland, but Irish Grass Fed Beef was produced in both Ireland and Northern Ireland and the term "Irish" was historically used to designate products produced in both territories. Ireland and the UK entered into a series of consultations and negotiations. In 2022, they agreed to amend the product specification so that the protected territory was extended to cover Northern Ireland. There was already precedent for such shared EU GIs between Ireland and Northern Ireland (UK), namely Irish Whisky / Uisce Beatha Eireannach PGI, Irish Poteen / Irish Poitín PGI, and Irish Cream PGI.
The Commission re-examined the application because of the substantial amendments, and determined that the changes were justified, since the quality, reputation and characteristics of grass fed beef in Ireland and in Northern Ireland were similar. The revised application was published and, with no oppositions received, adopted by the Commission in 2023.
The Opposition
IFOI put forward several grounds of opposition, but they boil down to the argument that the extension of the protected territory to include Northern Ireland should have been regarded as a new joint application and therefore required fresh procedural opportunities to raise objections.
In its decision on 15 April 2026, the General Court emphasised that the right of every person to be heard under the Charter of Fundamental Rights is not intended to apply where a person considers themself to be affected by an act of general application, as is the case here.
IFOI argued that the Commission should have ensured that Ireland organised a new opposition procedure in relation to the amended application, in accordance with the principle of good administration. The General Court noted that Regulation 1151/2012 does not expressly oblige the applicant Member State to implement a national opposition procedure after an initial application for registration has been the subject of opposition at EU level, especially where the opposition has been resolved through appropriate consultations. However, if there have been substantial amendments, the Regulation implies that the Member State from which the GI application was lodged is to initiate a new national opposition procedure.
The General Court determined that the Commission was required, in application of the principle of good administration, to ensure that Ireland had in fact initiated a national opposition procedure for the amended application. The case file showed that the Commission had done this. There were emails from the Commission recommending that Ireland re-publish the PGI application, extend their consultation period, and allow for oppositions. Ireland subsequently confirmed to the Commission that it had received no oppositions. The Commission was under no obligation to ask the competent Irish authorities to provide additional proof that the opposition procedure had actually been implemented.
Final Thoughts
Some headlines have framed this case as an objection to the inclusion of Northern Ireland in the protected area per se. However, reading between the lines of the opposition and the case history (especially the fact that IFOI opposed the PGI application in 2020, before Northern Ireland was even included), it's pretty clear that their actual problem lies with the approach of the Irish authorities.
While the Commission acted in accordance with the law, the dispute highlights the important procedural requirement that national authorities arrange new opposition procedures if the GI application has been substantially amended, to allow those within the Member State to share their views. This is crucial because only those from outside the Member State from which the GI application originates can file oppositions under the EU-level procedure in Article 51 of Regulation 1151/2012 (and the equivalent provision in Article 17 of the new Regulation (EU) 2024/1143).
DO YOU WANT TO REUSE THE IPKAT CONTENT? PLEASE REFER TO OUR 'POLICIES' SECTION. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES OR REQUESTS FOR PERMISSION, PLEASE GET IN TOUCH WITH THE IPKAT TEAM.
https://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2026/04/eu-general-court-rejects-opposition-to.html