The European Commission has referred France to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) over its mandatory Triman logo requirement. It is the nationally mandated EPR sorting symbol introduced under French Law No 2020-105 that requires most household products to carry sorting instructions alongside the logo. The case is technically a notification compliance dispute, but its timing gives it considerably broader significance.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Commission’s Legal Argument
The Commission’s case rests on two distinct grounds.
The first is a trade barrier argument. Brussels contends that requiring the Triman logo and accompanying sorting instructions on most household products, with limited exceptions, constitutes a measure equivalent to a quantitative restriction on imports, in violation of Article 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). In practical terms, this means the Commission views the requirement as an obstacle to the free movement of goods across the single market.
The second ground concerns procedural compliance. Under Directive (EU) 2015/1535, member states are obliged to notify the European Commission of any draft technical regulation before it is adopted, so that the Commission can assess its compatibility with EU law. The Commission argues that France failed to fulfil this notification obligation for the technical specifications relating to the Triman symbol, specifically those covering information society goods and services as defined in Article 1(1)(c) of the SUPD.
This is not the first time Brussels has raised these concerns. A letter of formal notice was sent to France in February 2023, followed by a reasoned opinion in November 2024. France did not bring its legislation into compliance at either stage. The May 2026 referral to the CJEU, which adds the notification failure under Directive 2015/1535, represents the latest step in the infringement procedure.
Why This Case Matters Beyond France
The Triman case sits at the intersection of two competing priorities that the EU has not yet fully reconciled: the drive toward harmonised, EU-wide packaging labelling under the PPWR and the existing patchwork of national EPR labelling systems that member states developed in the absence of such harmonisation.
France is not the only member state to have developed national EPR labelling requirements that diverge from a common EU standard. Several member states operate their own consumer-facing recycling labels, each with different visual designs, sorting categories and legal requirements. For producers selling across Europe, this fragmentation creates a genuine compliance burden.
The Commission’s own Joint Research Centre published a proposal earlier this year for a unified EU-wide sorting label framework, explicitly aimed at reducing this fragmentation. The infringement action against France can be read in that context: Brussels is signalling that national labelling requirements that were not properly notified and that restrict trade will not be allowed to persist as the PPWR’s labelling framework takes shape.
A Parallel Case: Iceland and Packaging Waste Enforcement
In a separate but related development, the EFTA Surveillance Authority referred Iceland to the EFTA Court in 2025 for failing to enforce rules on packaging waste prevention, the types of packaging placed on the market and the management of landfill operations. That case followed a letter of formal notice in August 2022 and a reasoned opinion in February 2023, a timeline that mirrors the French infringement procedure almost exactly.
Taken together, the two cases reflect a broader enforcement push across European institutions against member states and EFTA countries that have not fully implemented or properly applied their packaging waste obligations.
Conclusion
The CJEU referral against France is a significant development for the packaging industry, not because the outcome is uncertain but because of what it signals about the direction of EU packaging labelling policy.
National EPR labelling systems that were built outside the EU harmonisation framework are coming under increasing scrutiny and the PPWR’s labelling implementing acts, expected later this year, will set the framework within which member states must operate going forward.
For packaging producers and brand owners active in the French market, the case is worth monitoring: any ruling that affects the legal status of the Triman requirement will have direct implications for label compliance and product placement.
