Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 193kWORD 25k
29 April 2015
Question for written answer E-006806-15
to the Commission
Rule 130
Adam Szejnfeld (PPE) , Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein (PPE) , Dariusz Rosati (PPE) , Bogdan Brunon Wenta (PPE) , Marek Plura (PPE) , Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE) , Danuta Jazłowiecka (PPE) , Danuta Maria Hübner (PPE) , Julia Pitera (PPE) , Krzysztof Hetman (PPE)

 Subject:  Investor guarantees and a change to legislation in force
 Answer in writing 

Member States are responsible for determining the conditions governing the drawing of and trade in natural mineral water. Differences in those rules must not, however, impede the free circulation of mineral water on the European single market.

Unfortunately, however, the Muszynianka cooperative from Krynica Zdrój in Poland has experienced such problems. The cooperative has invested substantial sums in a mineral water treatment plant in Slovakia, and in pipelines leading to bottling plants in Poland. Although the company complies with the requirements laid down in Slovak law, the Slovak authorities were late in issuing their decision authorising the drawing of mineral water, resulting in financial losses for the company. Furthermore, Slovak law was amended in the meantime, putting the Polish company at a disadvantage. It has been established that mineral water from springs in Slovakia is a national asset, and the transport of water drawn from those springs has been prohibited. An exception has been established for drinking water, but only if it is bottled in Slovakia.

It would seem that the aforementioned Slovak legislation, which excludes from the market water producers from other EU Member States, constitutes a breach of the fundamental principles of the free movement of goods and non-discrimination on grounds of origin.

Can such regulations be seen to be consistent with the EU’s principles? And could the Commission please take action in response to the case described above?

Original language of question: PL 
Legal notice