27 C.F.R. § 13.51

Revocation by operation of law or regulation

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

TTB will not individually notify all holders of certificates of label approval, certificates of exemption from label approval, or distinctive liquor bottle approvals that their approvals have been revoked if the revocation occurs by operation of either TTB-administered law or regulation or applicable law or regulation of other agencies. If changes in labeling or other requirements are made as a result of amendments or revisions to the law or regulations, the certificate holder must voluntarily surrender all certificates that are no longer in compliance. The holder must submit applications for new certificates in compliance with the new requirements, unless TTB determines that new applications are not necessary. If a new application is unnecessary, it is the responsibility of the certificate holder to ensure that labels are in compliance with their requirements of the new regulations or law.

[T.D. ATF-406, 64 FR 2129, Jan. 13, 1999, as amended by T.D. ATF-483, 67 FR 62858, Oct. 8, 2002]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2003–2005 · leading case: Bronco Wine Co. v. Jolly, 29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 462 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bronco Wine Co. v. Jolly, 29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 462 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “( 27 C.F.R. § 13.51 (2002) .) If a COLA is revoked for lack of compliance, the holder is entitled to notice and a hearing.”

Bronco Wine Co. v. Espinoza, 128 Cal. Rptr. 2d 320 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003). “( 27 C.F.R. § 13.51 (2002).) [14] 27 Code of Federal Regulations section 4.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.