Joris DeeneThe rise of alcohol-free alternatives is unstoppable, but legal pitfalls lurk. On 13 November 2025, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the designation “alcohol-free gin” is not allowed by law. Because ‘gin’ by definition must contain alcohol, the combination with ‘alcohol-free’ is misleading and in violation of European regulations, even if it is clear to consumers that it is a 0.0% product.
The facts and context
The market for non-alcoholic ‘spirits’ is growing, but struggles with the correct designation. The immediate cause of this ruling was a dispute in Germany. The company PB Vi Goods marketed a beverage under the name “Virgin Gin Alkoholfrei”. The ‘Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb,’ an organization that fights against unfair competition, went to court.
Their argument was clear: according to European rules, gin must have an alcohol content of at least 37.5% and be produced by flavouring ethyl alcohol with juniper berries. The producer defended itself by arguing that the addition “alcohol-free” (and “Virgin”) removed any doubt for consumers and that banning this name would violate its freedom of enterprise.
The German court then submitted preliminary questions to the EU Court of Justice to clarify the validity and interpretation of the European Regulation.
The decision: strict protection of the name ‘Gin’
The Court of Justice is implacable in its judgment of Nov. 13, 2025 (Case C-563/24). The ruling rests on two pillars:
- Ban on the name: Article 10, paragraph 7 of Regulation (EU) 2019/787 prohibits the use of legal designations (such as rum, whiskey, gin) for beverages that do not meet product specifications. Since gin is legally required to contain ethyl alcohol and a minimum percentage of 37.5%, a beverage without alcohol simply cannot be called “gin.” The Court clarifies that adding clarifying terms such as “alcohol-free,” “style,” “type,” or “flavor” does not remove this prohibition.
- Validity of the ban: The Court confirms that this infringement of the freedom of enterprise is justified. The aim is consumer protection and fair competition. If producers of non-alcoholic beverages were to ride on the protected reputation and quality expectations of ‘real’ gin, this would lead to unfair competition.
Summary: The designation “non-alcoholic gin” is prohibited because the product does not meet the essential requirements of the category of gin.
Legal analysis and interpretation
We see in this ruling a logical continuation of the strict line the Court has taken for years on the protection of designations of agricultural products.
Consistency in jurisprudence This ruling is in line with the well-known TofuTown ruling, which ruled that plant-based products cannot bear dairy names (such as “soy milk” or “vegan cheese”). The Court adopted a strictly formalistic interpretation: a legal name is a guarantee of quality. Consumers must have blind faith that a product named “gin” has been distilled in a specific way and contains alcohol. The addition of “non-alcoholic” creates a contradiction in legal terms that affects the integrity of the legal designation.
Information asymmetry and ‘Freeriding’ Legally, this is all about preventing ‘freeriding. Spirits producers must meet strict and costly production requirements in order to call their product ’gin. The Court protects this investment from dilution. Although Belgium has specific tax provisions that recognize non-alcoholic beverages (for example, on excise and packaging taxes), this is separate from the labeling rules harmonized at the European level. The legislator wants to avoid eroding the definitions of traditional beverages.
What this specifically means
This ruling has direct implications for several players in the Belgian market.
- For producers of non-alcoholic beverages: You should audit your branding and labeling immediately. Terms such as “Gin 0.0%,” “Alcohol-Free Gin” or “Virgin Gin” are no longer tenable and pose an infringement risk. You should opt for fancy names or descriptive names such as “Alcohol-free distillate with juniper aroma.” Creativity in marketing is required, without using the protected terms directly on the label.
- For retailers and the hospitality industry: Be alert to how you advertise these products on menus or shelves. Although the primary responsibility lies with the producer, selling or promoting products under a misleading name (such as on a beverage menu) could in theory also be considered a violation of labeling rules or unfair trade practice.
- For traditional distilleries: This ruling is a victory for the protection of your craft. It confirms that the name of your product enjoys a protected status that cannot simply be used for products that are diluted (literally and figuratively) in terms of product specifications.
FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions
Can I still use the term ‘Gin’ when I clearly add ‘alternative to’?
The Court is strict about this. Article 10(7) also prohibits combinations with terms such as “genre,” “type,” or “taste.” Using the protected name as a dominant part of the product designation is very risky. It is best to mention “non-alcoholic alternative” without placing the specific term “gin” prominently on the label.
Does this ban also apply to other drinks such as Whisky or Rum?
Yes. Regulation 2019/787 protects all spirits defined in the annexes. “Non-alcoholic Whisky” or “Rum 0.0%” fall under the same ban as gin because these beverages are also legally defined by the presence of alcohol and specific distillation methods.
Is the product itself now banned?
No, absolutely not. The ruling is only about naming and labeling. You are perfectly allowed to produce and sell a juniper-based non-alcoholic beverage, as long as you do not market it as “gin.”.
Conclusion
The Nov. 13, 2025 ruling creates clarity, but forces an immediate change in branding direction for the nonalcoholic beverage industry. The designation “gin” is reserved exclusively for the ‘real thing. For producers, this means innovation in naming; for consumers, it means more transparency about what exactly is in their glass.
Dutch 
English