Bordeaux Builders, Inc., a French corporation, and originating from its corporate
headquarters in New York in order to secure a construction contract.
The German government recently adopted a law defining “beer” as any alcoholic
beverage brewed in compliance with customary German brewing practices dating back
to the year 1516. These practices mandate specific procedures for every step in the
brewing process. Only natural ingredients are to be used in the brewing process. The
use of additives is specifically prohibited. As a result, imported alcoholic beverages
labeled and sold as “beer” in other states were prohibited from being sold as “beer” in
Germany. Instead, such products could only be sold as “malt beverages.” The stated
purposes of this law were to protect the public from products that contain additives and
prevent confusion by German consumers who associate the term “beer” with traditional
German brewing standards. The German law was challenged in court by Venezia
Brewing Limited (VBL), an Italian company that wished to sell its malt beverage
containing additives as “beer” in Germany. VBL claimed that the German law was
inconsistent with a European Union regulation that established standards for but did not
ban the use of additives in malt beverages. Does the German law violate European
Union law, including the regulation? Why or why not? Would your answer be different
if the European Union law was in the form of a directive that had not yet been
implemented by Germany? Why or why not? Does VBL have standing to challenge the
German law? Why or why not?