Before the judgment and after:
(not sure what a SAF lookalike is doing dressed
as an avocat sitting far left!)
In a judgment
that was given in less than three minutes Olivier Cousin was ordered to pay a symbolic
civil fine of €1 to both the INAO and the Fédération Viticole Anjou Saumur. In
addition he has to pay court costs of 90€ (a fixed sum that goes to the State)
and 600€. There is, however, a 20% reduction on the 90€ fee if this paid within
a month.
At the full
hearing on 5th March 2014 the prosecutor had asked for a fine €5000. A euro a piece is well short of this!
The verdict delivered by Françoise Pietri, the président of the Tribunal, was unfortunately barely audible as she has a very quiet voice and prefers not to use the microphone.
"I don't trick people," said Cousin
after the verdict. Cousin and his lawyer have 10 days to decide whether to appeal
against the judgment. Olivier's wife emphasised that the fine was a civil matter – damage to the plaintiffs’ commercial
rights and that her husband had not been condemned by the judges.
Eric Morain*,
Cousin’s Parisian lawyer, was ecstatic: “this is a very fine victory today – stupefying.
We gained everything we asked for. We are joyful – there is no question of an
appeal!”
Olivier Cousin questioned by journalists
after the verdict
There
appeared to be no-one present at the hearing from the Fédération Viticole, apart from
their lawyer. However, the Fédération has issued a statement:
'UNE VICTOIRE POUR LA PROTECTION DE
L’AOC ANJOU
La Fédération viticole de l’Anjou et de
Saumur prend acte de la decision rendue le 4 juin par le tribunal correctionnel
d’Angers dans l’affaire opposant le ministère public à Olivier Cousin.
Ce jugement qui condamne Olivier Cousin,
vient confirmer:
– Quel’ appellation d’Origine Contrôlée
«Anjou» reconnue depuis 1936 par décret fait
l ’objet d’une protection prevue par la loi au même titre que toutes lesautres AOC. L’utilisation du nom de la dénomination«
Anjou» pour commercialiser un vin produit en dehors du cadre de l’appellation d’origine
est simplement interdite.
– Que celui qui fait le choix de ne pas
se soumettre au dispositive decontrôle ne peut utilizer le nom« Anjou» sans se
render coupable de contrefaçon et de tromperie. Le choix de produire un vin endehors
de l’appellation d’origine est respectable. Cependant, il ne permet pas de jouer
les passagers clandestins au detriment des vignerons qui portent l’AOC. Il ne peut
y avoir d’exception selon la qualité suppose du vin, le mode de culture, le nombre
de bouteilles en cause, la seule localization des vignes ou l’image médiatique du
viticulteur.
Ce jugement constitue également un rappel
à la loi adressé à ceux qui seraient tentés de détourner la notoriété de l’appellation«
Anjou» sans en respecter les règles fixes par les pouvoirs publics. La Fédération
viticole de l’Anjou Saumur qui participle à la protection des AOC don't elle a la
charge maintiendra sa vigilance pour empêcher ce type de pratiques.'
Me Nathalie
VALADE Avocat SELARL LEXCAP
(Me Nathalie Valade replaced Me Alain Fouquet, who made such a pig's ear of the Fédération and INAO's case at the hearing in March. Following the 2014 municipal elections Fouquet has become a maire adjoint for Angers.)
••
The Tribunal
de Grande Instance d'Angers appears to have had little sympathy for the six charges
brought by the INAO, Fédération Viticole Anjou Saumur and Le Direction
Régionale des Enterprises, de la Concurrence. The civil fines are entirely
symbolic - the judges appear to have decided that the damage Olivier inflicted
on the interests of the INAO and the Fédération was absolutely minimal with the statement from the Fédération more wishful thinking than a true reflection of the reality. Their talk of 'contrefaçon' and 'de tromperie' surely bears little relation to the actual verdict.
4th June 2014: no picnic this time, just empty
space and a gathering storm
In contrast
to the hearings of October 2013 and March 2014 there was no picnic, no
demonstrations of support in front of the Angers Court. Olivier must have known
that the weather forecast would not have been favourable for a picnic today as
there have been heavy downpours. Whereas on the two other occasions the weather
was been fine and sunny.
Report on October 2013 hearing when case was put back to March 2014.
Report on March 2014 hearing.
