Basque justice has a strange hero this month: wine. And not just any wine. What the High Court of Justice of the Basque Country (TSJPV) did to reassure the council responsible for regulating wines originating in Rioja was essentially to prevent an internal division.

In a decision linked to a conflict dating back eight years, TSJPV took a stand against a group of winemakers from Rioja Alavesa, one of three regions that make up the wine region along with Rioja Alta and Baja. DO outside the Rioja umbrella is owned by Viñedos de Álava.

The real question is… What to expect next?

What happened? The Supreme Court of the Basque Country (TSJPV) has become one of the protagonists of the month in wine news. A few days ago, the Rioja Alavesa Wineries Association (ABRA) issued a decision that fundamentally casts doubt on its claims to create its own name with a different brand and label: ‘Viñedos de Álava’ (‘Arabako Mahastiak’).

The decision is important for a very simple reason. La Rioja Alavesa is one of the three regions that make up the Rioja Qualified Appellation of Origin (DOCa). The other two are Rioja Alta and Rioja Baja. Bringing together approximately 14,000 winegrowers and more than 600 wineries, the facility sold 325 million bottles in 2023.

Avoiding division? Yes, in other words, TSJPV, contrary to the division among some of the wineries in its region, supported the DOCa Regulatory Council’s claim and concluded that to date no one has been able to prove that there is a real difference between wineries and wineries. The new name that ABRA (‘Viñedos de Álava’) wants to introduce and the DOCa of Rioja Alavesa wines is a trademark that has been registered for some time and has gained its own prestige in the market.

What exactly does it say? The Basque Supreme Court is unequivocal in its decision of 5 November: “The fact that ‘Arabako Mahastiak-Viñedos de Álava’ has a different existence from the wines of Rioja Alavesa cannot be justified and it must be added that this wine does not err to the consumer as to the identity of the wine”.

Moreover, TSJPV argues that neither the Basque Government nor the initiative’s supporter, ABRA, have presented “sound elements or arguments” to justify the need for a new name. Therefore, the application for the preservation of the PDO ‘Viñedos de Álava’ and its registration in the community register was cancelled.

Are there any more arguments? Yes, the court is not just questioning whether there is a real difference between the promoted name and the existing name. His sentence goes further and highlights the risks this division can pose. First, because of the confusion it would create among consumers who would find wines with different names that actually overlap in geographic region.

Secondly, because of the situation that both brands will be in. The DOCa Rioja Regulatory Council argues that if the new branding goes ahead, its bottles will get the message across with a significant advantage: they will gain an “undue” advantage from the “hard-earned” reputation of Rioja wine.

Is this a new debate? No. The TSJPV decision is important because it makes it difficult for those who advocate the formation of ABRA and the Alava sect, but the conflict comes from behind. Since quite some time ago, to be precise.

Its origins can be traced back to at least 2016, the newspaper recalls. riojaThe DOCa Rioja Regulatory Council’s refusal to increase labels to inform the wine region (Rioja Alavesa) has led to disagreement in the industry. Movements have followed each other since then. From both sides. With the participation of the wineries as well as other co-stars.

The separation process has been enabled by approximately 40 Alava wineries belonging to DOCa Rioja. And as time went on, they managed to get the Basque Government to approve the creation of a “temporary national protection” so that ABRA wineries could sell their bottles under the name ‘Viñedos de Álava’. Shortly afterwards, TSJPV temporarily suspended this permit pending a decision from Brussels. Now the high court is once again complicating the future of Arabako Mahastiak’s record labels.

So what happens now? TSJPV’s decision is a blow to the claims of Alava wineries who want their own DOP, but that does not mean there is no longer a possibility of a split between Rioja producers. The decision of the Basque court is open to appeal. It can be filed in the Supreme Court within 30 days. There is also another key actor: Europe, which must definitively submit the title recognition dossier.

PNV has already warned that the decision of the Basque Supreme Court does not have to leave the final say. “Rioja Alavesa does not stand in the way of discovering new ways to define its wines as a region of quality and excellence,” Álava deputy Ramio González said this week.

Not only the Basque Government was involved in the extensive (and turbulent) process. The Ministry of Agriculture also published a report in which it opposed the new DOP, ruling that it would offer consumers essentially the “same wine” (from the same geographical region, with the same grape varieties and agricultural practices) but under two different appellations of origin. .

What is Brussels’ stance? A few days ago, Rioja MP César Luena (PSOE) addressed a question to the European Commission (EC) touching precisely on the wine divide. The socialist insists that TSJPV’s legal failure “makes ABRA’s ambition unviable and raises questions about the continuity of this demand at the European level.”

It therefore consulted Brussels on whether to archive its process. He even goes further: “Does the Commission have the means to repair the reputational damage suffered by DOCa Rioja during the application process for the ‘Viñedos de Álava’ PDO?”

What does the Organizing Board say? He admitted that he was satisfied with the TSPV’s decision and even issued a statement announcing the “judicial annulment of the Arabo Mhastiak-Viñedos de Álava PDO,” but his tone is far from triumphant. The reason is that he believes that the process does not benefit anyone. “While the sentence is satisfactory for DOCa, the council regrets the irreparable damage that has been done to Rioja’s brand and image since the beginning of the process, eight years ago, a grievance that the Court itself acknowledged and is reflected in the sentence.” The organization regrets the “noise” and “public confusion” and is reassured.

“Rioja is a successful project, a leader in the national market and a clear reference point internationally,” the council said. It sold 325 million bottles in 2023 “despite the circumstances” and boasts of “creating wealth” across its three regions, including 14,000 winemakers and more than 600 wineries. The statement warns that “despite attempts to lead us to believe that all wineries in the Rioja Alavesa region are seeking division,” this is not the scenario. “Nothing could be further from the truth.”

Image | Mario La Pergola (Unsplash) and Walter Frehner (Unsplash)

in Xataka | Spanish wine is in a bind and experts are beginning to suggest the unthinkable: uprooting thousands of hectares