Author: SME Chamber

Directive 2009/32/EC applies to extraction solvents used or intended for use in the production of foodstuffs or food ingredients. That Directive does not apply to extraction solvents used in the production of food additives, vitamins and other nutritional additives, unless such food additives, vitamins or nutritional additives are listed in its Annex I. The European Food Safety Authority (the Authority) evaluated the safety of dimethyl ether as an extraction solvent to remove fat from animal protein raw materials and expressed its opinion of 29 January 2009. The Authority concluded that there is no safety concern provided that the maximum residual limit of dimethyl ether is 9 μg/kg of extracted animal proteins.

 

Therefore the use of dimethyl ether as an extraction solvent to remove fat from animal protein raw materials should be authorised under the condition of a maximum residual limit of dimethyl ether of 9 μg/kg in the defatted protein product.

 

Part III of Annex I to Directive 2009/32/EC does not establish specific residue limits in foodstuffs for methanol and propan-2-ol resulting from the preparation of flavourings. Member States and the Commission pointed out that the general residue limit of 10 mg/kg for methanol and propane-2-ol, as set out in Part II of Annex I to Directive 2009/32/EC, is too strict if applied directly to flavourings.

 

Therefore specific limits should be set in foodstuffs for methanol and propan-2-ol resulting from their use for the preparation of flavourings from natural flavouring materials. Those limits should be lower than the limit of 10 mg/kg assessed as safe by the Scientific Committee for Food, in order to be considered as safe.

 

Comments are to reach the Technical Regulations Division within the Regulatory Affairs Directorate, in writing or via email by Thursday 25th August 2011.Tel: 2395 2000 Email:

 

The European Commission’s latest car price report shows that car prices fell by 2.5% in real terms in 2010 in the European Union as a whole. List prices for new cars also converged slightly. These long-term price trends support the Commission's decision last year that specific competition rules for the sale of new cars are no longer justified.

 

 

"It is good to see that consumers in Europe are benefitting from competition in the markets for new car sales and continue to enjoy significantly falling prices in real terms. The fact that price differentials between Member States narrowed further is a positive indicator of cross-border competition. I am also delighted to see that for the first time in a decade, real EU-wide prices for repair and maintenance services stopped increasing, a sign that the sector has understood the new rules of the game" said Joaquín Almunia, Commission Vice President in charge of competition policy.

 

Overall, price differences for passenger cars between Member States decreased, as expressed in manufacturers' price lists. But the differences remain big in some cases pointing to large savings for consumers shopping across borders. Within the euro zone, the price difference indicator remained unchanged.

 

The EU price index for cars (reflecting nominal prices paid by consumers, including rebates, VAT and registration taxes) increased by only 0.3%, against a 2.8% rise in overall consumer prices, translating into a remarkable fall in real car prices by 2.5%.

 

A total of 24 EU countries recorded a fall in real car prices. Prices were stable in another two countries (+0.2% in both Italy and Malta) while they increased in Portugal (+2.6%). In the latter case, however, it should be noted that buyers benefited from a greater-then-average fall in real car prices the previous year (-6.7%).

 

The fall in real prices was particularly marked in Slovakia (-17.4%), Bulgaria (-13.5%), Slovenia (-11.6%) and the Czech Republic (-9.0%). In Poland they decreased by 5.6%. Among the large markets, real prices decreased most notably in the UK (­3.7%), while Germany, Spain and France experienced more moderate price reductions (-1.9%, -1.6% and -0.9% respectively).

 

The fall in real car prices across the EU continues a trend observed for more than a decade, which indicates that competition between car manufacturers on the market for new cars is working.

 

Real prices for repair and maintenance, which had increased over the last decade by more than the general inflation levels, did not rise in 2010.

 

The car price report

 

The car price report is part of the Commission's monitoring of the motor vehicle sector. It outlines the list prices of 89 best-selling car models representing 26 brands throughout the EU. The report enables consumers to compare car prices across Europe and take advantage of the opportunities of the EU's Single Market.

 

A memorandum containing further analysis on price developments is available at:

 

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/sectors/motor_vehicles/prices/report.html

 

Competition rules in the car sector

 

A new competition law framework for the car sector entered into force in June 2010 (see IP/10/619 and MEMO/10/217). The main objective of the reform is to ensure more and better competition in the after sales markets, i.e. repairs and maintenance which represent a significant part of the costs of owning a car over its lifetime. The new rules make it easier to deal with practices such as failures to release technical information to independent garages or the misuse of warranties. Car manufacturers can, on the other hand, organise their sales networks as they see best, as the experience shows that there is fierce inter-brand competition.

 

The EU Prize for Women Innovators will be awarded to three women entrepreneurs, who were at some point during their careers beneficiaries of funding for projects under the RTD Framework Programme (FP) or the Competitive and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP). It is time to have your accomplishments recognised and maybe win one of the first EU Prizes for Women Innovators!

 

 

The following prizes are to be won:

 

1st prize: €100 000

 

2nd prize: €50 000

 

3rd prize: €25 000

 

First step: we will ask for your personal details. Second step: you will be asked to upload a scanned version of the business register of the company you (co-) founded as well as a scanned version of any official papers demonstrating that you received or are receiving FP or CIP funding. Please make sure that you have these documents at hand before you start the submission. As a last step, we would like you to present your achievements to us.

 

The application process is designed to be as simple as possible, and may be accessed by visiting: http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/index_en.cfm?section=women-innovators. Should you need further clarification, please call the help line directly on: 0032 483 506 825 or e-mail us at: .

 

The deadline for submission of applications is 20 September 2011 at 17.00. The award ceremony will take place on 5 December 2011 at the Innovation Convention organised by the European Commission in Brussels.

 

European Citizens who travel to any other EU country as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway or Switzerland are entitled to public sector healthcare in public hospitals if they fall ill or suffer an injury while abroad, provided they have a European Health Insurance Card (EHIC)

 

 

European citizens who are covered by a public sickness insurance scheme of one of the above countries are entitled to an EHIC. However, many countries expect patients to pay towards their treatment, even with an EHIC. You may be able to seek reimbursement for this cost when you are back in Malta if you are not able to do so in the other country.

 

Did you know that…

 

• Close to 185 million EHICs are currently in circulation in the EU? This amounts to over 37% of the EU population.

 

• Last year, Malta issued just over 50,000 cards and there were almost 150,000

 

cards in circulation?

 

• In 2010, the Maltese government received over €400,000 worth of healthcare claims for expenses incurred by persons using an EHIC issued by Malta whilst on temporary stays abroad?

 

Facts you should know about the EHIC

 

· It is generally valid for 5 years and entitles the holder to receive the same treatment as the nationals of the Member State being visited.

 

· It does not cover specific visits for medical treatment abroad, including visits to seek a second opinion. However, maternity care, renal dialysis and managing the symptoms of pre-existing or chronic conditions that arise while abroad are all covered by the EHIC.

 

· It complements private insurance but is not a substitute for it. It never covers the cost of bringing you back in Malta in the event of serious illness, accident or death. Private insurance is highly recommended for these cases.

 

Applying for the card is free and easy

 

Contact the Entitlement Unit at the Ministry for Health, the Elderly and Community Care on tel. 2299 2345 or click on: https://ehealth.gov.mt/HealthPortal/default.aspx. The Unit may also be contacted via email:

 

Standards EN 60065:2002/A12:2011 and EN 60950-1:2006/A12:2011 are considered to fulfill the safety requirements laid down for personal music players by means of Decision 2009/490/EC. The references of these standards shall be published in part C of the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU).

 

 

Products which will be in compliance with these standards as from the date of publication in the OJEU will also be presumed to be in compliance with the gernal safety requirements of the GPSD (2001/95/EC).

 

Background

 

By means of Decision 2009/490/EC, the European Commission had laid out safety requirements for personal music players so as to ensure that under reasonably foreseeable conditions of use, they are inherently safe and do not cause hearing damage.

 

In particular, the safety requirements stipulate that:

 

· Exposure to sound levels shall be time limited to avoid hearing damage. At 80 dB(A) exposure time shall be limited to 40 hours/week, whereas at 89 dB(A) exposure time shall be limited to 5 hours/week. For other exposure levels a linear intra- and extrapolation applies. Account shall be taken of the dynamic range of sound and the reasonably foreseeable use of the products.

 

· Personal music players shall provide adequate warnings on the risks involved in using the device and to the ways of avoiding them and information to users in cases where exposure poses a risk of hearing damage.

 

By means of the proposed draft Decision, Standards EN 60065:2002/A12:2011 and EN 60950-1:2006/A12:2011 are considered to fulfil these safety requirements and to comply with the general safety requirement of Directive 2001/95/EC. The proposed draft decision also stipulates that the references should be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. This will mean that from the date of publication onwards, products which are in compliance with the above mentioned standard will be presumed to comply with the GPSD.

 

By the end of the transition period (i.e. 24 January 2013), industry should have started to apply this standard to their products.

 

What will be affected?

 

This draft Commission Decision applies to personal music players and mobile phones with a music playing function.

 

Dates

 

Feedback to be received by the 16^th August 2011.

 

Comments to be sent to the Regulatory Affairs Directorate, Technical Regulations Division, Malta Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority by post or by e-mail –

 

It has been brought to our attention that some local importers and distributors are offering for sale in-vitro diagnostic kits and reagents that, although being CE-marked in accordance with Legal Notice 61 of 2002, they are labelled by their own manufacturer as “Not for diagnostic use”, “For Research Purposes only” or other similar statements implying that the products cannot be used for diagnostic purposes. This includes statements given on promotional material.

 

 

Such statements coming from the manufacturers themselves must be fully complied with and thus such products cannot be offered for use for diagnostic purposes. Users are being advised not to use products bearing warnings such as the above for diagnosis. It is the legal responsibility of the economic operators, not users, to ensure that only safe and legally compliant devices are placed on the market when these are used in accordance with their intended purpose.

 

Should you require any clarifications on the subject please do not hesitate to contact us. Mr. David Pulis on or 2395 2000.

 

A small Italian cheese company supplies mozzarella to a frozen pizza maker in France. After the French company falls behind on its payments, the Italian firm stops the shipments, but it’s stuck with thousands of euros of unpaid bills. How will the Italian company recover the debt? Today there is no easy answer. Fraudsters can easily move money from one Member State to another, stashing funds in several accounts in multiple countries.

 

Citizens also suffer when goods bought online are never delivered or an absent parent fails to pay maintenance from abroad. At the moment, it’s up to national law to require a bank to pay the money from a client’s bank account to a creditor. The current situation in the 27 Member States is legally complicated, time consuming and expensive. Around 1 million small businesses face problems with cross-border debts and up to €600 million a year in debt is unnecessarily written off because businesses find it too daunting to pursue expensive, confusing lawsuits in foreign countries. The European Commission today proposes a new Europe-wide preservation order to ease the recovery of cross-border debts for both citizens and businesses.

 

“I want to make recovering cross-border debts as easy as recovering debts domestically," said EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding. "Companies lose around 2.6% of their turnover a year to bad debts. This is a weakness of our single market which we must remedy swiftly and energetically! Businesses need a simple solution – an account preservation order effective Europe-wide –so that the money stays where it is until a court has taken a decision on the repayment of the funds. In these difficult economic times, companies need quick answers. Every euro counts, especially for small businesses.”

 

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) make up 99% of businesses in the EU. Around 1 million of these face problems with cross-border debts. Procedures for recovering debts from another country's jurisdiction are complex, multiplying the costs for businesses that wish to trade across EU borders. Typical problems range from differences in national law to the costs of hiring an additional lawyer and translating documents. Individuals face similar difficulties when seeking to get their money back from a rogue trader or maintenance defaulter in another EU country.

 

Today's legislative initiative aims to facilitate these cross-border claims and gives creditors more certainty about recovering their debt, thereby increasing confidence in trading within the EU’s single market. It is part of the Commission's “justice for growth”agenda, which seeks to harness the potential of the EU's common area of justice for trade and growth.

 

Background

 

The Regulation would establish a new European Account Preservation Order that would allow creditors to preserve the amount owed in a debtor's bank account. This order can be of crucial importance in debt recovery proceedings because it would prevent debtors from removing or dissipating their assets during the time it takes to obtain and enforce a judgment on the merits. This will raise the prospects of successfully recovering cross-border debt.

 

The new European order will allow creditors to preserve funds in bank accounts under the same conditions in all Member States of the EU. Importantly, there will be no change to the national systems for preserving funds. The Commission is simply adding a European procedure that creditors can chose to use to recover claims abroad in other EU countries. The new procedure is an interim protection procedure. To actually get hold of the money, the creditor will have to obtain a final judgment on the case in accordance with national law or by using one of the simplified European procedures, such as the European Small Claims Procedure.

 

The European Account Preservation Order will be available to the creditor as an alternative to instruments existing under national law. It will be of a protective nature, meaning it will only block the debtor's account but not allow money to be paid out to the creditor. The instrument will only apply to cross-border cases. The European Account Preservation Order will be issued in an ex parte procedure. This means that it would be issued without the debtor knowing about it, thus allowing for a “surprise effect”. The instrument provides common rules relating to jurisdiction, conditions and procedure for issuing an order; a disclosure order relating to bank accounts; how it should be enforced by national courts and authorities; and remedies for the debtor and other elements of defendant protection.

 

The proposed European Account Preservation Order Regulation will now pass to the European Parliament and the Council of the EU for adoption under the ordinary legislative procedure and by qualified majority.

 

For more information

 

European Commission – Justice newsroom:

 

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom

 

European Commission – civil justice:

 

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/civil

 

Please find herewith an update on the creation of the European Commission-funded EU SME Centre in Beijing which might be of interest to you. The EU SME Centre assists European Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) to export to and/or invest in China by providing a comprehensive range of free-of-charge, hands-on support services including the provision of information, confidential advice, networking events and training.

The Centre is funded by the European Union and also acts as a platform facilitating coordination amongst Member State and European public and private sector service providers to SMEs.

The Centre is now fully operational –on its website www.eusmecentre.org.cn you already find the first dozen of documents –sector studies (ICT, food and beverage …), certification guidelines, case studies of successful companies, etc. – which you and your member companies can download and use for free. Of course, SMEs can also send enquiries directly to the Centre via email or the website in case they require more specific information on the Chinese market, want to use their office space or meeting rooms, etc.

Commission Directive 2008/128/EC sets out the specific purity criteria concerning colours for use in foodstuffs, which colours are mentioned in European Parliament and Council Directive 94/36/EC of 30 June 1994 on colours for use in foodstuffs.

 

 

Under Article 30(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 specifications of the food additives covered under paragraphs 1 to 3 of that Article (which include also additives authorised under Directive 94/36/EC) shall be adopted, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 establishing a common authorisation procedure for food additives, food enzymes and food flavourings, at the moment those food additives are entered in the Annexes in accordance with those paragraphs.

 

Since the lists have not yet been drawn up, and in order to ensure that the modification of the Annexes to Directive 94/36/EC pursuant to Article 31 of Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 is effective and that additives so authorised comply with safe conditions of use, Directive 2008/128/EC should therefore be amended.

 

The European Food Safety Authority (hereinafter ‘the Authority’) has assessed the information on the safety in use of lycopene as a food colour from all sources in its opinion of 30 January 2008. The sources that were considered were the following: (a) E160d Lycopene obtained by solvent extraction of the natural strains of red tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) with subsequent removal of the solvent, (b) synthetic lycopene and (c) lycopene from Blakeslea trispora.

 

Current legislation lays down specifications only for lycopene of red tomatoes and needs to be modified respectively by including the other two sources. Specifications of lycopene extracted from red tomatoes need also to be updated. Dichloromethane does not need to be listed in the list of the extraction solvents, as it is not used any more for lycopene of red tomatoes, according to the information received from stakeholders. Maximum limit for lead needs to be lowered due to safety reasons, and the reference on heavy metals is too generic and not relevant any more. In addition the reference on natural strains needs to be updated according to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

 

Dichloromethane (methylene chloride) is being reported to be used for manufacturing ready-to-sale formulations of lycopene, mentioned also in the Authority's opinion on Safety of ‘Lycopene Cold Water Dispersible Products from Blakeslea trispora’ of 4 December 2008. Similar products are produced also from synthetic lycopene, as mentioned in the Authority's opinion on safety of Synthetic Lycopene of 10 April 2008. As the Authority evaluated this specific use, it is necessary to authorise this use by the same residual levels that were considered during the evaluation.

 

It is necessary to take into account the specifications and analytical techniques for additives as set out in the Codex Alimentarius drafted by the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). In particular, the specific purity criteria need to be adapted to reflect the limits for individual heavy metals of interest, where appropriate.

 

Comments are to reach the Technical Regulations Division within the Regulatory Affairs Directorate, in writing or via email by Friday 19th August 2011

 

Should any further information be required kindly contact the Technical Regulations Division of the Regulatory Affairs Directorate within the Malta Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority, using the following contact details: