Dispatches from the NI Health Claims 2010 conference

Free speech argument a "possible avenue": UK lawyer

This content item was originally published on www.nutraingredients.com, a William Reed online publication.

By Stephen Daniells

- Last updated on GMT

Related tags Law European union

Making claims based on non-conclusive but still substantial science is a "possible avenue" since denying a 'maybe' claim may challenge free speech rights, says a UK lawyer.

At the NutraIngredients Health Claims 2010 conference in Brussels, US attorney Jonathan Emord said that a legal action to challenge the strict claims assessment process enshrined in the EU health claims regulation could be pursued on the grounds of free speech.

In this interview, Owen Warnock from UK law firm Eversheds reacts to Emord's stance, telling Stephen Daniells that it is a "very interesting argument"​.

According to Warnock, what Emord says is "that perhaps we should be concentrating more on the situation where the science isn't conclusive but there is some evidence to suggest that it is a possibility. It's not certain. So why shouldn't you be allowed to make such a claim? That is a very interesting argument,"​ said Warnock.

Related topics Regulation Product claims

Related news

Follow us


View more