A request for a preliminary ruling has been referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union in case C-803/25. The case is expected to have significant implications for the practical application of Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, the cornerstone provision of EU food law governing food safety. At issue is the interpretation of the concept of “food unfit for human consumption” and whether it may also cover products that are neither spoiled nor contaminated, but whose composition and levels of certain substances raise safety concerns.
IMPORTANT: All content, concepts and materials published by IGI FOOD LAW constitute intellectual property of IGI FOOD LAW and are protected under copyright law. While inspiration is welcome, we kindly ask for ethical use of our materials and respect for IGI FOOD LAW’s intellectual property and know-how.
The national proceedings in Austria concern a food supplement marketed as “Curcuma 500”, containing 500 mg of curcuminoids and a black pepper extract providing approximately 4.75 mg of piperine per capsule. The product was intended for use at a dosage of one capsule per day. The national authority concluded that, under the recommended conditions of use, the supplement significantly exceeds the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for curcumin, which, for a person weighing 70 kg, amounts to 210 mg per day. This means that a single capsule delivers more than twice that level. It was further argued that piperine increases curcumin bioavailability and may therefore also enhance potential adverse effects. The authority also referred to signals concerning reported cases of hepatotoxicity associated with supplements containing curcumin or turmeric.
On this basis, the authority classified the product as unsafe food—not because it was considered “injurious to health”, but because it was deemed “unfit for human consumption”. This distinction is central to the case. Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 provides that food is unsafe if it is either injurious to health or unfit for human consumption. At the same time, Article 14(5) indicates that, when assessing whether food is unfit, consideration should be given to whether it is unacceptable for human consumption for its intended use due to contamination, putrefaction, deterioration, or decay.
The Austrian court asks, in essence, whether the situations listed in Article 14(5) constitute an exhaustive list, or whether the concept of food unfit for human consumption may extend beyond those cases. In other words, the Court is asked to clarify whether a significant exceedance of ADI and the presence of a substance enhancing bioavailability may, in themselves, justify classifying food as unfit. The court also raises the question of whether national law may adopt a broader interpretation, recognising food as unfit where its suitability for intended use is not ensured.
Implications for the food sector
The case is of particular importance for the food supplement sector. If the Court of Justice of the European Union allows for a broader interpretation of “food unfit for human consumption”, authorities may gain a stronger basis to challenge products not only in traditional cases of contamination or spoilage, but also where concerns relate to the dosage of active substances, bioavailability of ingredients, or recommended conditions of use.
For businesses, this may translate into the need for a more comprehensive assessment of product composition, active ingredient usage levels, and safety substantiation at the product development and market entry stages.
We will keep you informed on further developments and the outcome of the proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union.
We also invite you to subscribe to the IGI FOOD LAW ALERT (in ENGLISH), where we provide a monthly overview of key developments in food law, including expert insights and commentary. igifoodlaw@igifoodlaw.com
IGI FOOD LAW – FOOD LAW EXPERTS
IGI FOOD LAW – FOOD SUPPLEMENTS LAW
