Gabriela Kub\u00edkov\u00e1<\/strong> (Legislative Advocacy Manager, The European Institute for Animal Law & Policy) then introduced the first roundtable. Christian Juliusson<\/strong> (European Commission, DG SANTE, Animal Welfare Unit) presented the current shortcomings of EU animal welfare laws, highlighting the prevalence of general and unspecific standards (\u201copen norms\u201d), such as the use of words like \u201cappropriate\u201d throughout directives and regulations, or qualifiers such as \u201croutine\u201d in the prohibition on \u201croutine tail-docking,\u201d which remain undefined. He also explained that EU animal welfare legislation lacks extra-territorial effect, placing domestic producers at a competitive disadvantage compared to importers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Denise Candiani<\/strong> (Scientific Officer, European Food Safety Authority [EFSA]) discussed the central role of EFSA in providing scientific opinions to inform European Commission decisions on animal welfare, covering farmed animals, fur animals, and equidae. Her presentation also outlined EFSA\u2019s missions and functioning, and noted the increasing amount of deliverables they produce on animal welfare, as the EU\u2019s competence to regulate animal welfare expanded. She also described EFSA\u2019s engagement strategy, which includes consultations with stakeholders and the general public, calls for evidence, and expressions of interest to inform its scientific work. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Pauline Phoa<\/strong> (Assistant Professor, University of Utrecht) provided an overview of approaches to extra-territoriality in EU law, specifically in the context of animal welfare and rights legislation. She offered a three-prong classification of extra-territoriality: extra-territoriality as \u201ctrue extra-territoriality;\u201d the so-called \u201cBrussels effect\u201d as the expression of EU\u2019s soft power in exporting its standards; and extra-territoriality resulting from the EU\u2019s external relations understood as policy efforts to influence practices outside the EU. Situating these discussions in the historical context of the rise of the sovereign state in the 17th century, she discussed the many instances in which EU law produced extra-territorial effects. Examples specific to animal welfare and rights included the prohibition on whaling in international law and the application of EU animal welfare rules during transport beyond EU borders (as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the EU [CJEU] in 2015) as examples of \u201ctrue extra-territoriality;\u201d the voluntary compliance with EU standards by international producers to access the EU market as an example of the Brussels effect; and the inclusion of animal welfare standards in trade deals as an expression of EU policy objectives in external relations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The second roundtable, moderated by In\u00eas Grenho Ajuda<\/strong> (Farm Animals Programme Leader, Eurogroup for Animals), began with Alessandra Donati<\/strong> (r\u00e9f\u00e9rendaire at the CJEU), who discussed three rulings from 2020: Centraal Isra\u00eblitisch Consistorie van Belgi\u00eb and Others<\/em> (C-336\/19), Association One Voice and Ligue pour la protection des oiseaux v Ministre de la Transition \u00e9cologique et solidaire<\/em> (C-900\/19), and Asociaci\u00f3n para la Conservaci\u00f3n y Estudio del Lobo Ib\u00e9rico (ASCEL) v Administraci\u00f3n de la Comunidad de Castilla y Le\u00f3n<\/em> (C-436\/22). The first two cases concerned the use of animals in traditional practices (ritual slaughter and traditional hunting methods respectively), while the third focused on protecting wolves from \u201cpsychological damage,\u201d insofar as wolves are part of the ecosystem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Alice Di Concetto<\/strong> (Chief Legal Advisor, The European Institute for Animal Law & Policy) and Joren Vuylsteke<\/strong> (PhD Candidate, KU Leuven) co-presented on recent trends in EU case law and Member State litigation related to animals. Mr. Vuylsteke highlighted case studies from the Netherlands and Belgium concerning enforcement and access to justice in nascent litigation-based strategies initiated by animal advocates. Ms. Di Concetto identified general trends in CJEU case law that support the relevance of strategic litigation efforts. A first trend is the Court\u2019s reference to the sentience of animals as codified in the EU constitutional treaty. A second is the weighing of animals\u2019 interests in the Court\u2019s proportionality test, including in cases involving farmed animals, which could lay the ground for significant positive developments for animals in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n After offering personal remarks on the life and achievements of Louis Schweitzer<\/strong>, Laurence Parisot<\/strong> (President, LFDA) moderated the third roundtable. Nicolas Bureau<\/strong> and Emilie Chevalier<\/strong> (Universit\u00e9 of Limoges Law School) presented \u201cCodex Animalis,\u201d an online database gathering all EU animal legislation, regulations, and caselaw, developed in cooperation with French legal scholars, LFDA, and The European Institute for Animal Law & Policy. Prof. Chevalier presented the history and development of the project, as well as the important questions this project raises around the classification of animals, and the scope and sources of animal law as a discipline. The website is scheduled to launch in early 2026 in both French and English. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Members of the European Parliament Tilly Metz <\/strong>(The Greens\/EFA, Luxembourg) and Michal Wiezik<\/strong> (Renew Europe, Slovakia) then took the floor to discuss their work as policymakers in a challenging political environment for animals. MEPs Metz and Wiezik specifically shared knowledge about the political dynamics shaping the ongoing negotiations on the reform of EU legislation governing animal transport.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lastly, Pascal Vaugarny<\/strong> (Deputy Director, Fermiers de Lou\u00e9) and Agathe Gignoux<\/strong> (Legal and Public Affairs Manager, Compassion in World Farming France) shared their experience building alliances between the animal advocacy movement and the corporate sector through the French animal welfare label \u00e9tiquette bien-\u00eatre animal<\/em>. Mr. Vaugarny described the project\u2019s origins, born out of a multi-stakeholder cooperation between several animal advocacy organizations, including LFDA and Compassion in World Farming, and producers such as Fermiers de Lou\u00e9. In her presentation, <\/strong>Ms. Gignoux emphasized the importance of aligning economic objectives \u2013 including the need for a level playing field for producers \u2013 with meaningful animal protection objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Notre conf\u00e9rence, organis\u00e9e en collaboration avec la LFDA, intitul\u00e9e \u201c Protection des animaux et droit europ\u00e9en : \u00e9volutions r\u00e9centes et changements \u00e0 venir \u201d, s'est tenue la semaine derni\u00e8re \u00e0 Bruxelles et a r\u00e9uni plus de 50 participants issus de plus de 30 organisations.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":3312,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[40],"language":[26],"class_list":["post-3306","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-events","tag-animal-law","language-english"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3306","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3306"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3306\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3409,"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3306\/revisions\/3409"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3312"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3306"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3306"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3306"},{"taxonomy":"language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/language?post=3306"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/IMG_20251118_103052.webp\" "\\"\\"")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/IMG_20251118_121908.webp\" "\\"\\"")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/IMG_20251118_153245.webp\" "\\"\\"")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/animallaweurope.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/IMG_6502.webp\" "\\"\\"")
<\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"