Author Archives: Henry & Bricogne

In its November 2019 issue, the legal journal Dalloz AJ Contrat publishes Xavier Henry’s comments on the judgment handed down on 19 September 2019 by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) concerning the communication by car manufacturers of technical information about their vehicles to independent repairers. This is an opportunity for the ECJ to recall the rights and obligations of car manufacturers with regard to EU Regulation N° 715/2007.

__________________________________________________________________

Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal of 6 November 2019 on the single agreement and the significant imbalance in the relationship between an car manufacturer and a distributor

The Paris Court of Appeal had to rule on disputes raised by an automobile distributor concerning the single agreement proposed by a car manufacturer (represented by our firm). The disputes were based on Article L. 441-7 (former) of the French Commercial Code (now Article L. 441-3) governing single agreements and on Article L. 442-6, I, 2° (former), now Article L. 442-1, I, 2°, of the same code relating to significant imbalance. Two main lessons can be drawn from the judgment rendered on 6 November last:

  • there was no subjugation to unbalanced obligations if the distributor was multi-brand and belonged to a large distribution group, which did not reflect an unbalanced balance of power. The single agreement could therefore not be challenged on the basis of Article L. 442-6, I, 2° (former).
  • the supplier wasfree to set a deadline for its distributors to sign the single agreement even if this date was before March 1 (in this case, the agreement had to be returned on December 1 of year n -1). If it was not returned within the time limit, the distributor was not entitled to the variable discounts stipulated in the agreement.

CA Paris arrêt 19.11.06

___________________________________________________________________

On 16 October 2019, the daf-mag.fr website published an article written by our firm entitled “Anti-competitive agreement: definition and risks”, which is a reminder that sometimes agreements between companies can distort competition and lead to serious fines.

https://www.daf-mag.fr/thematique/gestion-risque-1241/breves/est-entente-anticoncurrentielle-quels-sont-risques-343108.htm#rtT50XbeFQ32wpGb.97

___________________________________________________________________

In its September 2019 issue, the Revue Lamy de la concurrence publishes an article by Xavier Henry entitled “Selective distribution and refusal to contract: the difficulty of reconciling Metro I case law with exemption regulations” (RLC n° 86 9/19 , p. 31).

In three recent decisions, the Paris Court of Appeal and the French Competition Authority had to examine, under competition law, the validity of a refusal to contract from heads of selective distribution networks to candidates for entry into these networks. In particular, they verified that the refusal to contract did not have an anti-competitive object in the light of the case law resulting from the Metro I judgment of the Court of Justice. However, this research does not seem useful because a refusal to contract which does not constitute a hardcore restriction within the meaning of the applicable vertical restraints exemption regulations is not unlawful in itself. The refusal to contract could possibly only constitute a restriction by effect (which was however not the case in the Court of Appeal’s décisions).

Revue Lamy de la concurrence n° 86 09 19 p. 31 Distribution sélective et refus de contracter

___________________________________________________________________

The law or companies provide a number of guarantees in favour of buyers of goods. Their multiplicity means that litigants may be lost, especially regarding time limits for asserting their rights. An article from our Law Firm published by the website chefdentreprise.com provides an update on this issue.

https://www.chefdentreprise.com/Thematique/juridique-1055/Breves/Garantie-vices-caches-garantie-conformite-garantie-commerciale-quels-delais-agir-342309.htm#sRBlDpODiPV9EvGY.97

___________________________________________________________________

Since 2008, “significantly unbalanced” clauses in commercial contracts have been prohibited when imposed by the strong party to the contract. Review of this ban, sometimes unknown, which was reformed last April 24 in an article published by our firm on the website chefdentreprise.com

https://www.chefdentreprise.com/Thematique/juridique-1055/Breves/Contrats-commerciaux-attention-clauses-desequilibrees-341228.htm#PBRcLzfTShjUFMlj.97

___________________________________________________________________