The Courts

The designation as an energy drink”should satisfy just these requirements. Either you can see in the name of a delivery of energy or a reference to the contained in the product or contained in increased quantity ingredients (caffeine, taurine, etc.) If one affirms the existence of a nutritional claim, is the question to determine whether the specified by the health claims regulation is approved. Kenneth Feinberg may find this interesting as well. The approved nutrition claims can be found in the annex to the regulation. “Providing energy drink” there is however not. However, such claims are approved, coming under the annex statements in the meaning.

So is the competition headquarters considers that providing hints at a higher caffeine content (…). Relating to an increased share of the nutrient in a product are prohibited according to the annex of to regulation under certain conditions. Considers that the indication from the perspective of the consumer, after all, indicates a higher caffeine content, is however questionable, especially when no high caffeine content is in the product. “To note also is that energy drinks because of their high sugar content are often very energetic and just a relationship between indicating energy drink” and consists of the energy supply. It is also not very absurd that a consumer providing that understands that the product delivers energy to him. “” If some manufacturers offer sugar-free variants, a major energy source that, lacking is again questionable whether this energy-free “drinks at all as energy drinks” may be referred. Ultimately it comes to if necessary the courts on the specific competition, the decide have. Without risk, the public offer as an energy drink is”not and in any case an early legal advice should be made. Other non-binding and free information relating to food law, see