powrót do Aktualności
The longstanding debate on the use of Nutri-Score in Poland has reached an important milestone: in its letter of 24 September 2026, the Polish Ministry of Health communicated its position on withdrawing the scheme from the labelling of products manufactured in Poland and outlined the agreed transitional periods. Dr Izabela Tańska and Joanna Olszak of IGI FOOD LAW participated in the debate, consistently presenting regulatory arguments concerning the legal status of the logo and the requirements applicable to food information provided on a voluntary basis. These issues extend beyond the Polish market: in 2026, questions concerning the permissible form and content of such labelling were also referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
© IGI FOOD LAW. All rights reserved. Copying, publishing or using copyright-protected portions of this text in other works requires IGI FOOD LAW’s prior permission, except where permitted by law. IGI FOOD LAW reserves the right to pursue legal remedies for copyright infringement.
Over several years, IGI FOOD LAW’s experts worked with scientists, other experts and organisations involved in the Nutri-Score debate. At meetings in ministries, parliamentary committee sessions, scientific discussions and other forums, they presented their position on the regulatory grounds for using the logo. IGI FOOD LAW’s analyses and arguments formed part of the broader debate preceding the Ministry of Health’s current position.
The experts contributed an essential element of any labelling assessment: determining how a communication addressed to consumers should be legally classified and which requirements follow from that classification.
These questions have direct implications for food businesses. The answers affect both the legal compliance of labelling and advertising and the ability to maintain the chosen communication over the long term.
The significance of these issues is reflected in proceedings before the Conseil d’État, France’s highest administrative court. By a decision of 16 June 2026, the court referred questions to the CJEU concerning Article 35(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011. The request was lodged on 22 June 2026 and registered as Case C-687/26, Groupe Lactalis. The questions concern whether a Member State may recommend a summary assessment of nutritional value expressed through a letter or colour code, without separately displaying the energy value and amounts of nutrients. The second question concerns whether such an assessment may take into account elements beyond the nutrition declaration specified in Article 30, provided that they are directly linked to its elements or to additional mandatory particulars.
For IGI FOOD LAW, this is an important confirmation of the significance of an issue raised in the firm’s analyses: the boundary between presenting nutritional data and providing an algorithm-based assessment of a product. The uncertainty surrounding that boundary was sufficiently serious for the French court to seek the CJEU’s interpretation. The reference does not prejudge the outcome. It concerns Article 35 rather than the classification of the logo as a claim. On the latter point, the Conseil d’État took a different position, finding that Nutri-Score, when used in accordance with the administrative specification, does not constitute a nutrition or health claim. This further highlights the need for a precise analysis of the distinct legal grounds.
The forthcoming CJEU judgment may clarify the scope of Article 35 in relation to schemes such as Nutri-Score and determine whether this type of summary assessment falls within the permissible additional forms of expression and presentation of the nutrition declaration.
IGI FOOD LAW’s argument began with the distinction between repeating data and communicating an assessment of that data. The repetition of nutrition information on the front of a package is governed by Articles 30(3) and 34(3) of Regulation No 1169/2011. By contrast, Nutri-Score’s letter and colour communicate the result of an algorithm. The use of nutritional data in the calculation does not, in itself, determine whether the resulting assessment falls within the additional forms of expression and presentation provided for in Article 35.
A second issue concerns the logo’s status as food information provided on a voluntary basis. Voluntary use means that a business chooses whether to display the communication; once displayed, however, it must comply with the applicable legal requirements. Article 36(2) requires such information not to mislead consumers, not to be ambiguous or confusing and, where appropriate, to be based on relevant scientific data.
The green A and B ratings are particularly relevant. In its answer to parliamentary question P-003026/2019, the European Commission expressly stated that Nutri-Score, considered in its entirety, constitutes voluntary information under Article 36. It also stated that a logo conveying a positive message through a light-green or dark-green colour fulfils the legal definition of a nutrition claim.
This distinction was an important element of IGI FOOD LAW’s argument. A green rating suggests beneficial nutritional properties of the product. Where its presentation or accompanying communication also suggests a health benefit, the rules governing health claims must additionally be assessed. A favourable nutritional assessment and a claim about an effect on health require separate legal classification.
Classification as a claim raises further questions about the conditions of use. In its 2020 report, the Commission linked the use of schemes falling within Regulation No 1924/2006 to their adoption by a Member State in accordance with the notification procedure under Article 23. IGI FOOD LAW’s analyses therefore highlighted the need to clarify the legal grounds for using the scheme in Poland. Neither the popularity of a logo nor its adoption in another country replaces an assessment of the requirements applicable to the particular market, taking account of the principles governing the free movement of goods.
According to the arrangements communicated in the Ministry of Health’s letter of 24 September 2026, products covered by the stated transitional period may be placed on the market until 31 December 2028 and subsequently remain on the market until stocks are exhausted, but no later than 31 December 2030. The Ministry also indicates that products from other EU Member States, manufactured and labelled in countries that have officially adopted these schemes, may continue to be present on the Polish market.
From a regulatory perspective, it is significant that the Ministry refers to the requirement for national notification of schemes such as Nutri-Score — an issue that formed an important part of IGI FOOD LAW’s argument. However, the letter does not identify the legal basis for that requirement or explain the legal classification of the logo and the consequences of the absence of notification, leaving these matters without detailed justification.
Participation in the project and the outcome of years of joint work are a source of satisfaction for IGI FOOD LAW. The firm contributed regulatory analysis that enabled specific questions to be raised about the legality of the labelling and its conditions of use. The project brought together science, market practice, the consumer perspective and food law — areas whose interaction is central to IGI FOOD LAW’s work. We thank all the scientists, experts and organisations involved, as well as those who created opportunities to present the arguments over the years. Projects of this kind demonstrate the value of combining different areas of expertise with sustained, substantive work — an approach that also underpins the Summer School of Food Law.
Beyond the immediate consequences that may arise from having to change packaging, labels and advertising materials, the Nutri-Score case illustrates a broader risk: the need to revise a long-term marketing strategy built around a particular communication or labelling scheme. The key lesson for businesses is that the legal status of information should be thoroughly assessed before it becomes part of a long-term marketing strategy. A logo, statement or rating scheme can become an established element of portfolio positioning and brand identity. Uncertainty about its legal grounds may therefore require a restructuring of communication and undermine the assumptions behind years of marketing investment.
This applies to nutrition and health messages as well as information about a product’s nature, origin, method of production or environmental impact. For each communication, the applicable rules, conditions of use and supporting evidence must be established. The assessment should also cover images, colours, symbols and the context in which consumers understand the message.
At IGI FOOD LAW, we treat this analysis as part of planning product development and communication. It helps determine whether the chosen marketing direction has the legal foundations needed for its compliant use and continued development. The Nutri-Score case demonstrates the importance of asking the right regulatory questions early enough.
For questions about food labelling, advertising or the regulatory aspects of marketing strategies, please contact IGI FOOD LAW. We would be pleased to discuss how we can support your business igifoodlaw@igifoodlaw.com
