Olivier cousin : guilty of doing organic under the uncontrolled name

The reason for leaving the ranks of the Anjou appellation dates from 2005, the AOC allows the addition of sugar and acid - chaptalisation, acidification —, even for vintages with a favorable climate.

Except the story doesn't end there. The famous wine "Anjou Olivier Cousin" - NDLR the acronym gives AOC - also mentioned "made in Anjou" and a second wine was called "Pur Breton" - name of origin of the Cabernet Franc grape variety —. The Leviathan named Fédération Viticole, decides to control its production and the decision is taken to ban the "Natural Wine" label from this biodynamic winegrower who is being prosecuted for "Deceptive commercial practice" and other offenses in the same barrel.

I remember being told once, "The very principle of provocation is super simple : when you answer it, you give visibility to the provocateur and in addition you have all your chances to sink into the ridiculous. You don't answer and your pride takes a hit, but the time that erases everything plays in your favor. "This is basically the saying" the toad's slime does not reach the white dove ".

The public prosecutor playing his role - zealously - appealed against the court's decision by the simple and mechanical principle of: if there is an offender, there is a fine and therefore a penalty. We can't blame him, this is his job. But where my previous paragraph makes perfect sense, it is that the Wine Federation and the INAO rather than burying this affair to whip other cats, appealed civil party.

The 22 September 2015, the Angers Court of Appeal reversed the judgment at first instance and found Olivier Cousin guilty without conviction. The judge found our brave winegrower guilty of having usurped the name and selling drinks without proper mentions or labeling., and by also retaining the offense of deceptive commercial practice for which he was acquitted.

The Leviathans realized they were being ridiculous and therefore commented on the judgment with these words, "It is a satisfactory decision., because the deception is recognized. The goal was not to punish Mr. Cousin and the dispensation of the sentence does not pose a problem for us ".