The information you can request before buying
Food businesses in the EU must tell you when specified allergenic substances are used as ingredients, whether you buy a packaged snack, a restaurant meal or food online. The shared rules cover 14 groups. How a restaurant presents the information can depend on national law. The essential distinction is between what went into the recipe and what could enter accidentally during preparation: an ingredient declaration does not answer both questions. The Commission’s 2026 allergen guidance sets out the common framework.
For a traveller, the useful outcome is a precise answer about a specific item before ordering. Start with the named substance you need to avoid, identify whether the food is prepacked or supplied loose, then obtain the relevant ingredient information. Ask separately about handling and cross-contact. This guide explains information rights and a practical conversation; it cannot determine whether a particular dish is suitable for your individual condition.
What the 14 disclosure groups mean
The Commission’s February 2026 factsheet lists cereals containing gluten; crustaceans; eggs; fish; peanuts; soybeans; milk; specified nuts; celery; mustard; sesame; sulphur dioxide and sulphites above 10 mg/kg or 10 mg/litre; lupin; and molluscs. These are legal disclosure groups, not a complete list of everything that can cause a reaction. Do not assume an unhighlighted ingredient is irrelevant to you simply because it falls outside these groups.
Precision matters within a group. Germany’s LAVES authority explains that the particular cereal or nut should be identified: wheat or rye, for example, and almonds or hazelnuts. Peanuts are a separate group from the listed nuts. Annex II also contains specific exemptions for certain derived products. State the actual ingredient you are concerned about rather than asking only whether something is ‘allergy friendly’. Read the whole label, not just a familiar symbol.
Packets, restaurants and national presentation rules
For a prepacked product, the Your Europe labelling guide explains that relevant allergens must stand out in the ingredients list, for example through bold type. Where no ingredients list is required, the indication normally uses ‘contains’ followed by the allergen. A food name that clearly identifies the substance can remove the need to repeat that allergen separately. These presentation rules do not make every packet look identical. Check the item you will actually buy, including its current formulation and language.
Which information route fits the purchase?
| Purchase | What to look for | What still needs checking |
|---|---|---|
| Prepacked food | Highlighted allergenic ingredients; “contains” where applicable | Exact product, formulation and label language |
| Food at a restaurant or counter | Allergen information for the particular item | National presentation route; recipe changes and handling |
| Food ordered online or by phone | Relevant information before purchase and at delivery | National format rules and identity of the delivered dish |
| Possible accidental presence | Precautionary warning or a specific preparation explanation | Absence of a warning does not certify suitability |
Federal Europa synthesis of Commission, Your Europe and Regulation 1169/2011 guidance, checked 11 November 2026.
A restaurant, bakery counter or café meal follows the non-prepacked route. The Commission’s food-information legislation account confirms that allergen information is mandatory here too. Article 44 of Regulation 1169/2011 leaves countries room to set the means of providing it. The absence of symbols beside every menu item therefore does not by itself establish a breach across the whole EU. Equally, ‘we do not provide allergen information’ is not a general exemption for a small restaurant.
Two verified national examples show why the distinction matters. Ireland’s FSAI guidance requires written, item-specific information that is readily accessible before sale or supply; customers at the premises should not need to ask for it. LAVES describes Germany’s conditional oral route: staff must be trained, the route signposted, and a written record for the particular food available on request. These examples concern national presentation rules, not different EU lists of allergenic ingredients.
One EU baseline, two national presentation routes
| Scope | Verified approach | Practical next step |
|---|---|---|
| EU baseline | Allergenic-ingredient information is mandatory for non-prepacked food; Article 44 allows national modalities | Do not assume one menu-symbol system across all countries |
| Ireland, food at the premises | Written, accessible, item-specific information before sale or supply; no need to ask for it | Locate the written information for the chosen dish |
| Germany, conditional oral information | Trained staff, signposting and a food-specific written record accessible on request | Ask the trained person and request the written record |
Sources: Irish S.I. 489/2014, current FSAI guidance and Germany’s LAVES. Distance sales have separate timing/format details.
A traveller’s example: Dublin and Hamburg
Imagine an Estonian traveller visiting Dublin and then Hamburg. In Dublin, the traveller looks for the written allergen information associated with the selected dish. In Hamburg, a sign may instead direct the traveller to a trained staff member; they can ask to see the supporting written record. In both places the next question is the same: does today's complete dish, including sauce, garnish and substitutions, contain the named ingredient? A previous visit or an old online menu does not establish today's recipe.
Online ordering, delivery and language
Ordering through a website, app or telephone adds a timing test. Article 14 requires the relevant information before the purchase is concluded and at delivery; the rule also applies to non-prepacked food through Article 44. Under Ireland’s specific distance-selling provisions, the allergen information must be written at least at one of those two stages. Save the information used to order and check that the delivered item is the same dish. A note typed into an app is a request, not proof that the kitchen accepted it.
Language is another practical boundary. Article 15 requires mandatory food information in a language easily understood by consumers where the food is marketed and permits national official-language requirements. It does not promise every visitor a translation into their own language. Prepare the precise ingredient names in the destination language, and have an important translation checked rather than relying on an ambiguous icon or automatic translation alone. Use the venue's own legend to interpret its letters or numbers; do not carry a code from one menu to another.
Ask about cross-contact separately
Now ask the separate cross-contact question. The Commission explains precautionary ‘may contain’ statements as warnings about possible unintended presence, based on risk assessment. They do not replace good manufacturing practice. The absence of such a warning is not an individual guarantee of absence. Ask what the venue can establish about shared equipment, preparation surfaces and ingredient substitutions. If the answer remains uncertain, obtain a suitable alternative rather than treating a legally compliant ingredients list as a personal safety certificate.
A useful adaptable request is: ‘I need to avoid [specific substance]. Please show me the allergen information for [exact dish], including the sauce and garnish. Can the person responsible for preparation confirm today's ingredients and explain any cross-contact risk? Please tell me if you cannot establish this.’ A checked translation can help carry that request across a border. Keep the ingredient question and the handling question together when the order passes from the waiter or app to the kitchen.
Keep evidence and use the right authority
If information is missing or contradictory, record the business name, location, date, exact item, menu or listing, packaging and batch code where relevant, receipt and the answer you received. Raise the specific discrepancy with the business and report suspected food-information non-compliance to the food authority responsible for that location. The Commission’s enforcement explanation assigns monitoring and penalties to Member States. A refund dispute is a separate consumer matter; our consumer-rights guide helps identify that route. Urgent illness requires healthcare, not completion of a complaint file.
Shared European rules make a local meal easier to navigate across borders, while national authorities remain responsible for enforcement. The practical discipline is simple: name the substance, check the exact product, identify the national information route and ask about preparation separately. Our EFSA and RASFF feature explains the wider science-and-alert system behind food protection; the EHIC guide covers a different question, access to necessary public healthcare during a temporary stay.