Bordeaux barons face up to five years in prison for allegedly manipulating the rankings to inflate the price of their chateaus’ vintages.
Henry Samuel — telegraph.co.uk
It is a landmark trial that has gripped the Bordeaux wine world.
Two top figures from Saint Emilion, southwestern France, on Monday stood accused of rigging the region’s coveted Grand Cru Classé rankings to help inflate the price of their chateaus’ vintages.
The case could have major implications for the entire wine region.
Hubert de Boüard, 65, co-owner of the famed chateau Angélus and a wine consultant, along with Philippe Castéja, 72, wine merchant and owner of the chateau Trotte Vieille, face charges of “illegal taking of interest” by acting as both judge and jury in drawing up the coveted list.
The pair face a maximum sentence of five years in prison and fines of ?500,000 (£430,000) if found guilty.
Prosecutors say that as influential members of INAO, France’s wine governing body, the men were unfairly able to ensure that their own domains, as well as others that they were paid to advise, maintained their ranking or joined the select club.
“It’s as if someone passed the baccalaureate (A level) exam after writing the subjects himself,” said Eric Morain, lawyer for the plaintiffs.
The legal battle has been simmering in the Unesco-protected village since INAO published its long-awaited new classification for St Emilion in 2012. The ranking has two main categories: Grand Cru Classé and the more prestigious Premier Grand Cru Classé.
Unlike Bordeaux’s most famous 1855 classification, which is set in stone, the St Emilion ranking is reassessed every 10 years.
Entry is said to boost the price of the wines – reds made predominantly from Merlot and Cabernet Franc grapes – by about 30 per cent, and thus also affect property prices.
The top four A-grade chateaux – Ausone, Cheval Blanc, Pavie and Angélus – are among the most expensive wines in the world. A bottle of Angélus will set buyers back around £400, with Ausone soaring into the thousands.
In the 2012 rankings, INAO selected 82 chateaux in St Emilion – some 64 Grands Crus Classés and 18 Premiers Grands Crus Classés.
But the disgruntled owners of three chateaus – La Tour du Figeac, Corbin-Michotte and Croque-Michotte – cried foul after the first failed to make the grade, the second lost its Grand Cru Classé status and Croque-Michotte was refused promotion from Grand Cru to Grand Cru Classé.
Their lawyer accused the Bordeaux prosecutor’s office of being under political pressure to have the case quashed, after it appealed against the investigating magistrate’s decision to send the case to court.
“I know of no procedure in which the prosecution has done that except when it concerns a gendarme or policeman,” he said. “It was imperative to save private Boüard and Castéja at all costs.”
He also contended that the entire St Emilion ranking system was on trial. “We are going to talk about a system that doesn’t tell the consumer that the tasting note only counts for 30 per cent in the ranking,” he said, noting that the rest is based on the fame of the chateau and other criteria. He added that it’s “a system that sells brands and no longer grapes”.
Both accused deny any wrongdoing. Defence lawyer Antoine Vey said that both men were “systematically removed” from INAO meetings when votes were cast on rankings.
On Monday, Mr Boüard told the court: “In no way did I take part.” He added: “Within the framework of INAO, I respected the rules from start to finish.”
But Mr Boüard was also a member of the organisation for the defence and management of St Emilion wines, ODG, which also helped draw up the criteria for the rankings.
The indictment stipulates that he was present “at every stage of the procedure”.
“I was not told it was forbidden,” he told the court, adding that all decisions were “unanimous” among dozens of winemakers.
Prosecutors pointed out the “constant to-ing and fro-ing of emails” between the winemaker and ODG and INAO. “I didn’t think for a second that responding to them would be something reprehensible,” he said.
Mr Vey said the defendants were the victim of sour grapes.
“They are taking the flack for the three unfortunate candidates (for the rankings),” he said. “The aim of this criminal action is to cause harm.”
A separate administrative case has seen the 2012 put on ice while legal appeals continue.
The trial continues.