9-Year Legal Battle Confirms Restaurants Must Clearly List Allergens

A landmark ruling by the Court of Appeal has confirmed that restaurants are legally obligated to clearly inform customers about allergens in every dish. The case stems from a customer, B.T., who suffered an allergic reaction after being served a meal containing peanuts, which was not adequately labeled.

 

The dispute lasted nine years, with the Court of Appeal upholding the first-instance decision requiring the restaurant to compensate the customer. Importantly, the court emphasized that allergen information cannot be provided only “upon request” or as a small note in a corner of the menu — it must be clearly visible and linked to the specific dish.

 

Key Facts of the Case

• On July 22, 2016, B.T. consumed a meal at the restaurant and experienced an allergic shock due to peanuts in one of the dishes.

• The restaurant argued that the customer had not informed staff about his allergy beforehand, but the court ruled that the responsibility lies with the restaurant to provide mandatory allergen information.

• The Court of First Instance awarded €1,000 in general damages and €10 in special damages, a decision largely upheld by the Court of Appeal.

 

Legal Basis

The ruling references EU Regulation 1169/2011 and European Commission guidance, establishing that:

• Allergens must be clearly indicated for each dish.

• A general reference to allergens or offering information only when requested is insufficient.

• Violation of this regulation constitutes a civil liability, protecting the individual right to health and safety.

 

Menu Practices and Safety

During the trial, the court examined the restaurant’s menus, which included vague labels like “H- spicy” or “V- vegetarian” but lacked specific allergen information. Even general allergen notes were deemed insufficient unless linked to the actual dish served.

 

Procedural Notes

The restaurant challenged the case on procedural and evidentiary grounds, including reliance on medical certificates. The Court of Appeal rejected these objections, confirming that the initial proceedings were properly conducted and that the evidence was sufficient.

 

Legal Costs

The appeal partially adjusted costs related to an interim application in 2018, ordering B.T. to bear these costs, but otherwise confirmed him as the overall winner. The court awarded €800 plus VAT in appeal costs to B.T.

 

Takeaway for Restaurants and Consumers

This case serves as a critical reminder that clear allergen labeling is not optional — it is a legal obligation. General references to allergens or “ask us” policies do not meet EU standards. Proper labeling is essential for customer safety and legal compliance.

________________________________________