Jurade de Saint-Emilion

Premier Grand Cru Classé and Grand Cru Classé

Saint-Émilion had no part in the 1855 Left Bank classification and had no classification system of its own until 1955. Unhandicapped by an old system, it was able to create a modern one. Within the higher Appellation of Saint-Émilion Grand Cru, there are two levels of classified growth - Premier Grand Cru Classé (itself sub-divided into "A" and "B") and Grand Cru Classé. The classification takes place anew about every ten years, both for those already classified and those wishing to be so, so that there is a complete review. It has not been true, as some critics thought would be the case, that the numbers of classified growths would increase with each review. Indeed rather the reverse has happened, especially in the case of the Grands Crus Classés. In 1955 there were 12 Premiers Grands Crus Classés and 63 Grands Crus Classés. Whilst 1969 saw a further 9 Grands Crus Classés added bringing the total to 72, the 1986 review gave only 11 Premiers Grands Crus Classés and 63 Grands Crus Classés. Ten years later, in 1996, there were 2 new classifications as Premiers Grands Crus Classés, giving a total of 13, but only 55 Grands Crus Classés emerged from the review. The proposed 2006 classification would have seen a further decline in the latter's numbers to 46, although Ch. Pavie-Macquin and Ch. Troplong Mondot each became Premier Grand Crus Classé.

The proposed 2006 list, alpahbetically, with an asterisk marking the additions, included:

Premiers Grands Crus Classés
A: Ch. Ausone, Ch. Cheval Blanc;
B: Ch. Angélus, Ch. Beauséjour (Duffau Lagarrosse), Ch. Beau-Séjour-Bécot, Ch. Belair, Ch. Canon, Ch. Figeac, Clos Fourtet, Ch. La Gaffelière, Ch. Magdelaine, Ch. Pavie, Ch. Pavie-Macquin*, Ch. Troplong-Mondot*, Ch. Trottevieille

Grands Crus Classés:

Ch. Balestard la Tonnelle, Ch. Bellefont-Belcier*, Ch. Bergat, Ch. Berliquet, Ch. Cadet Piola, Ch. Canon la Gaffelière, Ch. Cap de Mourlin, Ch. Chauvin, Ch. Corbin, Ch. Corbin Michotte, Ch. Dassault, Ch. Destieux*, Ch. Fleur-Cardinale*, Ch. Fonplégade, Ch. Fonroque, Ch. Franc Mayne, Ch. Grand Corbin*, Ch. Grand Corbin Despagne*, Ch. Grand Mayne, Ch. Grand Pontet, Ch. Haut Corbin, Ch. Haut Sarpe, Ch. L'Arrosée, Ch. La Clotte, Ch. La Couspaude, Ch. La Dominique, Ch. La Serre, Ch. La Tour Figeac, Ch. Laniote, Ch. Larcis Ducasse, Ch. Larmande, Ch. Laroque, Ch. Laroze, Ch. Le Prieuré, Ch. Les Grandes Murailles, Ch. Matras, Ch. Monbousquet*, Ch. Moulin du Cadet, Ch. Pavie-Decesse, Ch. Ripeau, Ch. Saint-Georges-Côte-Pavie, Ch. Soutard, Clos de l'Oratoire, Clos des Jacobins, Clos Saint-Martin, Couvent des Jacobins

The 1996 list, also included, as Grands Crus Classés:
Ch. Bellevue, Ch. Cadet Bon, Ch. Faurie de Souchard, Ch. Guadet Saint-Julien (now called Ch. Guadet), Ch. La Marzelle, both Chx. La Tour du Pin Figeac, Ch. Petit Faurie de Souchard, Ch. Tertre Daugay, Ch. Villemaurine and Ch. Yon Figeac. (Since 1996 part of Ch. Curé-Bon-la-Madelaine has been incorporated with Ch. Canon – PGCC.)

Classification, criteria - and controversy

Any classification system is human and is bound to be subject to controversy and criticism and this has been true of Saint-Émilion's as well. Inevitably decisions have a subjective element and in a wine world of partisan championship of different styles, arguments will arise. More importantly, wine invites love - and wine lovers who feel a particular beloved has been slighted or overlooked will inevitably be furious on its behalf. Litigation has been known to follow the announcement of the Classification Committee's decisions and four Châteaux – Cadet Bon, Guadet Saint-Julien (now known simply as Ch. Guadet), La Tour du Pin Figeac and La Marzelle – challenged the 2006 classification. The principle of classification itself was not under challenge but only the mechanics of the tastings of some of the different wines submitted. That challenge led to the suspension by a first instance Court, upheld on appeal in March 2009, of the whole classification. The suspension left a vacuum, pending an expected reclassification procedure, with no grower lawfully being able to rely on the previous classification as currently valid. In order to alleviate that problem for most, pending a new and valid classification, a Ministerial decree initially revived the 1996 classification for 2006 to 2009 which, of course, left everybody with the status they then had. Whilst that relieved the difficulty for most Châteaux, it was, on any view, very hard on those who had been found to merit promotion. In May 2009 the Governement effectively added those Chateaux which had been intended to be promoted in the 2006 classification to the 1996 one, finally removing that problem. The classification will now last until 2011. The consequence, therefore, of a combination of the litigation and the subsequent Government intervention has been to approve promotions proposed by the 2006 classification but overturn its proposed demotions.

The 2006 classification gave rise to further controversy, although it did not lead to legal action on this ground, because the Committee’s interpretation of the requirement in the rules that it should take into account price, led to several Châteaux being denied a higher classification on the sole ground (le seul motif) that they sell at too low a price - it is well known that Ch. Figeac, a Premier Grand Classé B, was refused promotion to join Ausone & Cheval Blanc as Premier Grand Classé A for this reason, a decision widely criticised in the English speaking world.

Moroever, some Châteaux had been in the process of improving markedly under new ownership or direction but were still demoted, presumably because they were thought to have been less good during the early part of the relevant period Château Bellevue, for example, was widely thought to be in this category as were some of those who, unlike that Château, took legal action.

Nonetheless, whilst there will always be room for discussion and debate, the system provides assistance for customers new to, or not very familiar with, the Jurisdiction's wines as well as wider public recognition of the especial excellence of those classified, even when there are strong arguments for saying that there are others of equal quality whose merits have not been officially recognised or as fully recognised as they deserved.

THE NEW CRITERIA

Following the problems with the 2006 classification, a review of the rules for classification has taken place, not by the Saint-Emilionais themselves but by central authority. The new rules were promulgated on 6th June 2011 by ministerial order and a new classification process will shortly begin under them.

They can be found in French here

There will be an independent Classification Commission which is to be composed of members of the INAO National Committee or those chosen for their special competence. There will thus be much less local involvement under these rules than before and anybody with a direct interest in the classification is barred, thus, presumably, preventing negociants being directly part of the process.

Up to fifteen years’ vintages may be taken into account for Premiers Grands Crus Classés and ten for Grands Crus Classés.
An application has to be made by the grower supported by a dossier covering the activities of the relevant ten or fifteen year period.

One of the major changes is that tasting by the Commission has, for those seeking to remain as, or promotion to, Grand Cru Classé, become the most important criterion to judge the level of quality and consistency and will count for 50% of the final result, the remainder being made up of an assessement of national and international reputation as shown by the dossier supporting the application (20%), with an assessment of technical aspects of the estate and production making up the balance. Price should therefore be considerably reduced in importance for the Grands Crus Classés.

It is understood by the author of this note, on very good authority, that all those seeking to remain as, or to be promoted to, Premier Grand Cru Classé will first have to satisfy the criteria applicable to Grands Crus Classés, passing the tasting and other tests for that level first before being submitted to the different criteria for Premier Grand Cru Classés.

The marking system is rather different for Premiers Grands Crus Classés, in respect of which classification will be based less on tasting criteria - 30% of the final result - than the other factors taken together. It remains to be seen whether, at higher levels, the effect of the new rules will be that wines which qualify on quality grounds are promoted notwithstanding that their selling price is lower than other wines of similar quality which are classified.

Applicants' wines will be marked out of 20 with a requirement to obtain 14/20 for classification as Grand Cru Classé and 16/20 for Premier Grand Cru Classé. It is also understood by the author of this note, again on good authority, that the marks awarded will neither be communicated to the applicants nor made public, so there will be no classification within a classification.

The decision as to whether a Premier Grand Classé should be A or B will depend only on its reputation or fame and its capacity to age. These criteria, on their face, mean that it is unclear whether the problem faced by Ch. Figeac in 2006 could in theory arise again. There is no requirement for a particular higher mark out of 20 for this distinction as there is for other gradations in the classification nor, despite the requirement for capacity to age, is a longer period than 15 years taken into account.

Challenge to any individual decision in relation to a Château will no longer require challenge to the whole classification but only to that individual case, so that all other decisions would stand and the whole classification would not be imperilled as happened in 2006. There is provision for a re-examination of individual cases with a grower having a right to be heard.

The requirement that an applicant's wine should have been Grand Cru for seven out of the ten relevant years has gone in the new rules but the candidate vineyard must over the relevant period have produced an average of at least 50% of the wine under the same name as that which is the subject of the application. In order to qualify for consideration the estate also has to be a sufficiently large economic and viticultural unit and have cellars used exclusively for the candidate wine.

On pain of being declassified, candidates have to undertake for the following ten years not, without proper authority, to modify in any way the property on which the classified wine was made, and must also undertake to bottle it at the Château.

Home