University Littoral-Cote d'Opale (Dunkerque)

Rodolphe Mesa

University Littoral-Cote d’Opale (Dunkerque)
Lecturer

Mr. Mesa is a lecturer at Université du Littoral Côte d’Opale.

Linked authors

University Littoral-Cote d’Opale (Dunkerque)
University Littoral-Cote d’Opale (Dunkerque)

Articles

130240 Review

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition : The French Supreme Court considers that the lack of similarity between two advertising slogans is exclusive of any risk of confusion and implies, consequently, rejection of action based on economic parasitism (Grandvision)

368

The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 25 November 2015 goes back over the various conditions necessary to convict a competitor on the basis of economic parasitism. In this case, a company marketing optical products and exploiting various trademarks, whose (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Infringement : The French Supreme Court considers that the applicable law regarding infringement is that of the State whose protection is claimed (Tod’s / La Redoute)

334

The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 7 October 2014 returns to two interesting questions, namely the law applicable to the infringement action and the compatibility with European Union law of the differences in copyright protection that may exist in the (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Risk of confusion: The French Supreme Court reassesses the issue of the risk of confusion in case of imitation of a corporate name and imitation of a domain name (Air architectures, ingénierie, recherche)

133

The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on June 24, 2014 reviews the factors used to assess the risk of confusion in the naming of competing companies in relation to companies exercising a regulated profession. In this case, the dispute was between the company (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Risk of confusion : The French Supreme Court specifies the elements that can be used to characterize the introduction of a risk of confusion constitutive of an act of unfair competition (Kaspersky / Eptimum)

177

The judgment delivered on 20 May 2014 returns to the assessment of the risk of confusion, the introduction of which is characteristic of an act of unfair competition. In that case, a company developing and marketing antivirus software on the internet brought an action for summary proceedings in (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition action : The French Supreme Court subordinates the action for unfair competition to the existence of an incident causing a loss/damage (SFR / Féridis)

207

The various rulings handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the French Supreme Court on March 25, 2014 in disputes between SFR and Féridis concern the terms of the unfair competition action. In these various cases, the former company had entered into agreements with several owners of parcels of (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Economic parasitism : The French Supreme Court considers that the parasitic act is the fact, for a trader, to place himself in the wake of another, unduly taking advantage of the latter’s reputation or investment, regardless of any risk of confusion (Tod’s, Maisons Pierre)

737

Cass. com, March 20, 2014, Tod’s Spa and Tod’s France v. François Pinet and Orphée Club, Appeal No. 12-18.518, published in Bulletin Cass. com, 20 May 2014, Maisons Pierre contre Fousse constructions et Constructions traditionnelles Val de Loire, appeal n° 13-16.943, not published in the Bulletin. (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Advertising: The French Supreme Court considers that the exercise of business activities in violation of the regulations and the dissemination of misleading advertising qualify as acts of unfair competition (Aud’ligne Taxi)

155

After the disputes between operators of passenger vehicles with drivers and taxi drivers, the ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on March 11, 2014 makes it possible to revisit the competitive relationship between taxis. In this case, an association of 15 (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Infringement: The French Supreme Court considers that the action for unfair competition may rely on elements that are factually identical to those raised in an infringement action dismissed (Revol)

155

The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on February 4, 2014 returns to the classic and common question of the relationship between unfair competition and counterfeiting. In this case, a company selling porcelain objects had one of its competitors sued for (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition : The Toulouse Commercial Court considers that the advertising and sale of electronic cigarettes by other that newsagent kiosk traders qualify as unfair competition (Herande c/ Esmokeclean)

190

In a ruling handed down on 9 December 2013, the Toulouse Commercial Court ruled on the legality of the sale of electronic cigarettes by non-buralist retailers and the advertising of these products. The consular judges prohibited such acts on the basis of unfair competition and ordered the (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Bashing : The French Supreme Court states that the disclosure of accurate and derogatory information is an act of unfair competition (Plein Air international, K France, ADG)

229

The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 24 September 2013 reviews the elements constituting the denigration characteristic of an act of unfair competition and its sanction. In this case, a company manufacturing and marketing gas appliances and gas (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Counterfeiting : The French Supreme Court states that a trademark user can obtain compensation for damage through unfair competition procedure based on counterfeiting facts (Abattoirs de Provence, Genedis et Charal)

130

While it is settled case-law that the owner of an intellectual property right who is the victim of an act of infringement can only obtain a supplementary conviction of the offender on the basis of unfair competition by proving a fact distinct from the fault of infringement (Cass. com.., 6 (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Obligation to no competition : The French Supreme Court considers that a member of a simplified joint stock company is not generally prevented from exercising a concurrent activity of the company (LBDI, EGT)

172

In its ruling handed down on 10 September 2013, the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation ruled on the question of whether a shareholder of a simplified joint stock company is liable, in his sole capacity as a shareholder, for a non-competition obligation towards the company. In this (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Misuse of customers : The French Supreme Court finds that the violation of an ethical rule does not necessarily constitute an act of unfair competition (Sofidex, Gescore, Compta Sud)

148

The Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation returns, with an important decision handed down on 10 September 2013 and published in the Bulletin, on the questions of the characterisation of the act of unfair competition following the transgression of a rule of professional ethics and the (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Misuse of customers: The Cour de cassation considers that there is no condemnation on the basis of customer poaching when there is no evidence that a former employee of a company working on behalf of a second has used unfair methods to establish business relationships with customers and suppliers (Inabata France/Prosyntis)

300

The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on July 9, 2013 maintains the strict evidentiary requirements with regard to proof of fault in the matter of customer diversion. In this case, the former employee of a company, who had been dismissed for serious (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition by confusion: The Cour de cassation points out that the slavish imitation of a product sold by a competitor whose likelihood might arise confusion in the mind of the customer is an act of unfair competition (Christian Liaigre)

522

The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on July 9, 2013 returns to the characterization of unfair competition by confusion. The case decided was between a furniture designer and a furniture manufacturer. The former had entrusted the latter with the plans of (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Parasitic competition: The Cour de cassation considers that the conviction of an economic operator on the basis of parasitic competition assumes that the applicant brings both evidence of the investment he made and of the embezzlement by his rival of the returns of his investment (CSF/Distribution Casino France)

190

The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 9 July 2013 is interesting in that it reviews the conditions for sanctioning an economic operator on the basis of parasitic competition. In this case, a company operating supermarkets and hypermarkets had, after (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition: The Cour de cassation reiterates that the admissibility of the action for unfair competition is independent of the admissibility of an action for infringement (Antilles On Lines/Ouloger.com)

184

The ruling handed down by the First Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation on April 10, 2013 goes back over the complex relationship between the action for unfair competition and the action for infringement. In this case, an online travel sales company that accused a competitor of having (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition: The Cour de cassation considers the solicitation, by a former employee, of a client of his former employer falls within the principle of free trade (Proditrans express/Mercier)

165

The Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation returned to the regime of canvassing of the customers of others with regard to the law of unfair competition with its ruling handed down on 19 March 2013 concerning the situation in which the canvassing is carried out by a former employee of the (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition: The Cour de cassation considers that the practice of carpooling is lawful and finds that the loss of chance is serviceable (Transports Schiocchet excursions/Onet Luxembourg)

218

The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 12 March 2013 is interesting for two reasons. On the one hand, because it rules on the practice of carpooling with regard to unfair competition law. On the other hand, because it specifies the elements of damages that (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition: The Court of cassation recalls the necessity for the plaintiff to prove the fault (Nestlé Nespresso & Nespresso France/Bodum; Groupe Léa nature & Léa institut Vital/La Photothèque)

417

"Cass. com., 25 September 2012, No. 11-21266, Nestlé Nespresso and Nespresso France v. Bodum." In two rulings handed down on 25 September 2012, the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation revisits the evidentiary requirements of economic parasitism, while recalling the principle of (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair practices: The Cour of cassation refers to the distinction between unfair competition and counterfeiting to clarify the purpose of the two actions (Milo/EDF et GDF)

172

Cass. com, 11.09.12, Milo v. EDF and GDF, No 11-21.322 The Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation returned, in its judgment of 11 September 2012, to the thorny issue of the distinction between counterfeiting and unfair competition, while adding contractual civil liability to the elements (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair practices: The Cour de cassation rules that the sale of computers with a software preinstalled is not an unfair labour practice when the consumer has the opportunity to find computers "naked" on another site dedicated to professionals, even though the installation of open source software is a delicate process which the selling company can not guarantee success (Hewlett-Packard/UFC Que Choisir)

134

Cass. 1st civ. 12 July 2012, Hewlett-Packard v/ association UFC Que Choisir, n° 11-18.807, published in the bulletin The ruling handed down by the First Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation on July 12, 2012 settles a question of consumer law, the answer to which is likely to produce certain (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair practices – Use of the competitor’s image: The Cour de cassation considers the image’s use of a castle belonging to a competitor as characteristic of the unfair competition (Château Marie du Fou/Jard Chais Mareuillais)

1149

Cass. 1st civ. 28 June 2012, Château Marie du Fou v. Jard Chais Mareuillais, appeal no. 10-28716, not published in the bulletin. The First Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, in a ruling handed down on 28 June 2012, has provided certain clarifications on the regime governing the use of the (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair practices - Diversion of customers: The Cour de cassation considers that the injury results necessarily of the customers’ diversion and that the responsibility for unfair competition is not subject to the beneficiary’s questioning of the wrongdoing (Applitex)

215

Cass. com, 26 June 2012, Applitex v. Mr X, appeal no. 11-19.520, not published in the Bulletin. The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on June 26, 2012 makes it possible to revisit the consequences of the misappropriation of customers and the conditions of (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition: The Court of Cassation rules that there is a diversion of customers when the manager of a company presents itself to customers of its competitor as an agent thereof (Copytel, Totalia, Euro maintenance)

147

Cass. com, May 15, 2012, Copytel c/ M. X..., Totalia and Euro maintenance, n° 11-12859 The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 15 May 2012 provides an interesting illustration of a misappropriation of customers to the detriment of companies involved in (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition and parasitic competition: The Court of Cassation rules that the imitation of a competitor’s products must be causing a risk of confusion to be sanctioned (J. M. Weston/Promoquestre ; La Marine)

308

Cass. 1st civ., April 5, 2012, J.M. Weston v/ Promoquestre, n° 10-27373 Cass. 1st civ. 4 May 2012, Mr. X... and sté La Marine v. Mrs. Y... and Mr. Z..., n° 11-13116 The two rulings handed down by the First Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, respectively on 5 April 2012 and 4 May 2012, (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition: The Court of Cassation states that the poaching of employees from a competitor is not a fault unless it is accompanied by unfair dealing and generates disruption of its business (Eurinter, La Solution interimaire, AS Interim, Agro Form, Afa)

335

Cass. com, 3 April 2012, Eurinter and La Solution interimaire c/ AS Interim, No. 10-27743 Cass. com, 3 May 2012, Agro Form c/ Afa, No. 11-18059 The Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation, in two judgments handed down respectively on April 3, 2012 and May 3, 2012, recalled the scope of (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition – Economic parasitism: The Court of Cassation recalls the conditions of the sanction of imitation and specifies the amount of damages (Midi Tielles/Coudène Michel)

347

Cass. com, February 21, 2012, Midi Tielles c/ Coudène Michel, n° 10-27966 The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 21 February 2012 makes it possible to reconsider the conditions for sanctioning unfair and parasitic competition by imitation of a competitor’s (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition: The Court of Cassation specifies the duties of a partner of a limited partnership in relation to unfair competition (Clos-du-Baty and D. L. Finances/Fabi)

327

Cass. com, November 15, 2011, Clos du Baty and Company D. L. Finances v. Fabi, SCI Chanterie and M. X..., No. 10-15049 The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 15 November 2011 is important in that it clarifies the contours of the unfair competition action. (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition – Confusion: The Court of Cassation recalls that a copy of a product that is not protected by an IPR is not illegal unless it is accompanied by an unfair act (Marc Jacobs International/Euroline and Galeries Lafayette)

453

Cass. com, November 15, 2011, Marc Jacobs International v/ Euroline and Galeries Lafayette, n° 10-25473 The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 15 November 2011 is interesting in that it returns to the contours of the protection of products that are not (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition – Confusion: The Court of Cassation recalls that a copy of a product that is not protected by an IPR is not illegal unless it is accompanied by an unfair act (Titanbagno/LT Aqua +)

1032

Cass. com, 4 October 2011, Titanbagno c/ LT Aqua +, No. 10-24009 The judgment of 4 October 2011 comes back, as does that of 15 November 2011 (Appeal No 10-25473, commented on elsewhere).), on how to protect products which are not the subject of an intellectual property right by means of the (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition: The Court of Cassation rules on principle of liability of a corporation for the acts of misappropriation of clients committed by its employees who are still in an employment relationship (Marquage moderne/Libell)

361

Cass. com, November 2, 2011, Marquage moderne c/ Libell, n° 10-26936 The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on November 2, 2011 makes it possible to reconsider the conditions of the action in unfair competition for customer diversion. In this case, an (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition – Economic parasitism: The Court of Cassation specifies the conditions of the sanction of imitation of a sign (Alfred Kärcher and Kärcher France/DCM Friesland)

312

Cass. com, 14 February 2012, Alfred Kärcher and Kärcher France v DCM Friesland, no. 10-27873 As regards the imitation of a non-banal sign or a product of an economic operator, the judgment of 14 February 2012 adopted a consistent solution, similar to that adopted subsequently in the judgment of (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Relationship between unfair competition and infringement: The Court of Cassation returns to the question of the relationship between unfair competition and counterfeiting and it also specifies the conditions of action in parasitism (X et Design Sportswears, Luna et Caractère)

630

Cass. com, September 6, 2011, Mrs. X... and Design Sportswears c/ Luna et Caractère, n° 10-18299 Certain questions of law regularly recur in court cases relating to unfair competition and economic parasitism, including the relationship between the civil liability action and the action arising (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition and parasitic competition: The Court of Cassation reviews the conditions of denigration (Univers pharmacie, Direct labo and Union des groupements de pharmaciens d’officine/Groupement d’achats des centres Leclerc)

854

Cass. com, 27 April 2011, Univers pharmacie, Direct labo et Union des groupements de pharmaciens d’officine c/ Groupement d’achats des centres Leclerc (Galec), n° 10-15648 On 27 April 2011, the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation handed down a particularly interesting ruling in that it (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition and parasitic competition: The Court of Cassation recalls that there is no unfair or parasitic competition without confusion (Molinard/Joy Box Holding and PB licence)

720

Cass. com, March 29, 2011, Molinard v/ Sociétés Joy Box Holding and PB licence, n° 09-71990 The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on March 29, 2011 is an opportunity to recall two principles relating to the sanctioning of acts of commercial disloyalty, namely (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition – Economic parasitism: The Court of Cassation specifies the conditions of unfair competition for imitation of a design (Interior’s/Couleur des Alpes)

1156

Cass. com, March 15, 2011, Interior’s c/ Couleur des Alpes, nº 09-72429 The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 15 March 2011 in the case opposing Intérior’s and Couleur des Alpes allows us to review the conditions of unfair competition and parasitic (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Economic Parasitism: The Court of Cassation clarifies the relationship between counterfeiting and economic parasitism (Granimond et M X.../Établissements Gaubier)

844

Cass. com, December 14, 2010, Granimond v/ Établissements Gaubier, No. 10-10951 In its judgment of 14 December 2010, the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation returned to the inevitable, but sometimes complex, relationships between the counterfeiting and economic parasitism regimes (see (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Procedures - Internet: The Court of Cassation makes jurisdiction of the French Courts subject to two conditions (Louis Vuitton Malletier/eBay and eBay international)

1008

Cass. com, December 7, 2010, Louis Vuitton Malletier v/ eBay Inc. and eBay international AG, No. 09-16811 The Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation returns, with the ruling of 7 December 2010, to the thorny issue of jurisdiction in matters of unfair competition acts carried out on the (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition – Infringement on the Internet: The Court of Cassation confirms a Court of Appeal which recognized the jurisdiction of the French Courts for unfair competition committed through the Internet (Parfums Christian Dior, Parfums Givenchy Kenzo and Guerlain/eBay)

1296

Cass. com, December 7, 2010, Parfums Christian Dior, Parfums Givenchy Kenzo et Guerlain c/ eBay Inc. and eBay international AG, No. 09-14545 This second judgment, handed down on December 7, 2010 and involving the various eBay companies, still deals with the determination of the criteria for (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Damages - Prohibition of lump sum compensation: The Court of Cassation rules that unfair competition cannot be compensated by a lump sum indemnity (Meny/Le Grand garage lorrain)

1299

The Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation recalled the guiding principles for the assessment of the sanction of a competitor who has committed an unfair act, with the ruling handed down on 23 November 2010. In this case, a company operating several car dealerships had issued an (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Burden and object of proof in the case of economic parasitism

1691

This article deals with the evidence necessary to establish parasitism, an act of unfair practice, in French law. In principle, civil responsibility procedural provisions should apply, as parasitism is a mere fault requiring regular proofs to be assessed. But case law requires in practice (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Misappropriation of customers - Misleading advertising: The Court of Cassation rules that misleading advertising amounts to unfair competition (Décathlon/Carrefour)

1329

The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 28 September 2010 is interesting in that it allows us to reconsider the characterisation of two types of behaviour that are punishable on the basis of unfair competition. In this case, a company operating a large (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Advertising on Internet: The Court of Cassation draws the conclusion of the Google France case law and confirms also that, in order to conclude to infringement of both counterfeiting and unfair competition rules, the plaintiff must assess different facts (CNNRH/Google and Tiger)

1284

Cass. com, 13 July 2010, CNNRH v Google and Tiger, No. 06-15136 It is not uncommon, in the case of trademark infringement, for the request for sanction of the infringement to be accompanied by a claim for damages based on unfair competition law. This cumulation, which is subject to the (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Accumulation of condemnations: The Court of Cassation rules that, in order to conclude to infringement of both counterfeiting and unfair competition rules, the plaintiff must assess different facts and that this requirement is met when the infringer sales the counterfeiting products (Free/Sporazur Morris Sportswear ; MNC Altona/Dubois Jardin and Silvpol Spolka Zoo)

1333

Cass. com, June 15, 2010, Free c/ Sporazur Morris Sportswear, n° 08-18279 Cass. com, June 15, 2010, MNC Altona v. Dubois Jardin and Silvpol Spolka Zoo, No. 08-20999 The questions of the relationship between actions for infringement and unfair competition and the cumulation of sentences (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair competition - Jurisdiction of French Courts: The Court of Cassation holds, when a foreign company makes a poaching of employees of a French company, that the causal event has occurred at the headquarters of French company taking into consideration the loss of skills and informations of the poached employees (Aluplast/Schüco)

1424

Cass. 1st civil, 14 April 2010, Aluplast GmbH Kunststoffprofile v/ Schüco international, No. 09-12792 When an act of unfair competition involves two companies of different nationalities, there is a conflict of laws but also, as far as legal proceedings are concerned, a conflict of jurisdictions (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Selective distribution network: The Court of Cassation rules that the mere fact of reselling branded goods reserved for selective distribution outside such network may constitute a violation of both a trade mark and fair competition; however, in order to establish both violations, the plaintiff must establish different facts and prejudice (Chanel ; Marm ; Bery ; Land)

2068

Cass. com, March 23, 2010, Chanel company v. Bery company, n° 09-66522, unpublished Cass. com, March 23, 2010, Chanel company v Land company, n° 09-65844, unpublished Cass. com, March 23, 2010, Chanel c/ société Marm, n° 09-66987, unpublished In three judgments handed down on 23 March 2010 in three (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Commercial cooperation - Tariff transparency: The Court of Cassation rules on the tariff transparency obligation in a commercial cooperation agreement (Carrefour Hypermarchés France et Interdis)

1252

Criminal case, February 9, 2010, Carrefour Hypermarchés France et Interdis, n° 09-81574 The decision handed down by the Criminal Division of the Court of Cassation on 9 February 2010 proposes an interesting application of the offence of Article L. 441-7 C. Com, in its wording resulting from the (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Unfair practices - Condition to act: The Court of Cassation rules that the existence of a risk of confusion arising from competitor’s practices is a prerequisite to act under the unfair competition provisions; in addition, such action may only be brought against alleged disruption of the competitor’s activity only if the defendant has actually committed an act aiming at such a result (Dan Foam and Tempur France/Ena ; Pac and Safe Tech)

1896

Cass. com, February 2, 2010, Dan Foam company and Tempur France v/ Ena company, n° 09-11303, unpublished Cass. com, February 16, 2010, Mr. X... c/ company Pac and company Safe Tech, n° 08-20482, unpublished In two rulings handed down respectively on February 2, 2010 and February 16, 2010, the (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Parasitism : The Court of Cassation rules that the proof of investments made by the victim hijacked by the parasite must be reported by the plaintiff in the action (Ouest France Multimédia et Precom/Direct annonces)

3904

Cass. 1st civ. 5 March 2009, Société Ouest France Multimédia and Société Precom v/ Société Direct annonces, n° 07-19.734 and 07-19.735 In its ruling handed down on 5 March 2009, the First Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation provided certain important clarifications on the evidentiary requirements (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Imitation : The Court of Cassation rules that the mere imitation of a competitor’s product is not necessarily an act of unfair competition and may be justified if done for the satisfaction of general interest (Granimond/OGF)

2732

Cass. com, January 27, 2009, Société Granimond v/ Société OGF, n° 08-10.991 The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on January 27, 2009 makes it possible to reconsider the conditions necessary for the imitation of a competitor’s products to be characteristic of an (...)

Daniel Fasquelle, Rodolphe Mesa Parasitism : The Court of Cassation holds that a mere contractual breach does not constitute parasitism (Soc. pluyolaise d’articles chaussants/Soc. Michel Fargeot)

4659

Cass. com, 11 March 2008, Société pluyolaise d’articles chaussants (SPAC) v/ Société Michel Fargeot, No. 07-10.413 The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 11 March 2008 provides some useful clarifications regarding the basis for the sanctioning of parasitic (...)

Rodolphe Mesa Counterfeiting and economic parasitism: Time for a new case-law ?

6240

According to the French Supreme Court’s recent case law, a competitor can be condemned both on the grounds of parasitism and of infringement of intellectual property rights (counterfeiting) only if it can be proved that he is responsible for two distinct facts, one relevant for parasitism and (...)

Daniel Fasquelle, Rodolphe Mesa Parasitism: The Court of Cassation holds that damages must be equal to the damage suffered as assessed by the 1st and 2nd instance Courts (Métropole télévision M6)

4703

Cass. com, May 30, 2007, Métropole télévision M6 c/ Sté LPG systems, n° 06-13.880, unpublished The Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation recalled the principles that should govern the determination of the amount of damages due by the perpetrator of a parasitic act in a decision handed down (...)

Daniel Fasquelle, Rodolphe Mesa Economic Parasitism - Counterfeiting: The Court of Cassation holds that the Court of Appeal, while rejecting alleged counterfeiting practices, should have searched for an intent of taking advantage of investments made by the acting party (Compagnie française d’eaux de vie et spiritueux)

4846

Cass. 1st civ., 20 March 2007, Mr X... c/ company Compagnie française d’eaux de vie et spiritueux, n° 06-11.522 and 06-11.657 In the absence of protection based on the provisions of the Intellectual Property Code, the question frequently arises as to whether it is possible to act on the basis of (...)

Daniel Fasquelle, Rodolphe Mesa Parasitism: The Court of Cassation considers that parasitism requires a risk of confusion and intention to take advantage of a third party reputation (Diramode et Promotion du prêt-à-porter/Jennyfer; Wirquin/Sanitaire accessoires services; Patrelle/Euro Confi)

7171

Cass. com, December 12, 2006, Diramode et Promotion du prêt-à-porter c/ société Jennyfer, n° 05-18.988 Cass. com, February 20, 2007, Wirquin c/ société Sanitaire accessoires services, n° 05-16.683 Cass. com, February 20, 2007, Patrelle c/ Euro Confi company, n° 05-17.004 The ruling handed down by the (...)

Daniel Fasquelle, Rodolphe Mesa Parasitic behavior - Counterfeit : The Court of Cassation holds that when a counterfeit action is brought, the liability of the defendant on the basis of parasitism requires a distinct event (Interbrew/Brasserie Fischer)

7445

Cass. com, 10 May 2006, Interbrew v. Brasserie Fischer, No. 04-15.612 Cass. com, 23 May 2006, Casple and Amstutz Levin v. Muller and Campa, No. 04-16.254. Cass. com, June 20, 2006, Mr. X...and Société Céline c/ Infinitif e. a., No. 04-20.776 The rulings handed down by the Commercial Chamber of (...)

Daniel Fasquelle, Rodolphe Mesa Counterfeiting/Parasitism: The Court of Cassation rules that actions against counterfeiting and parasitism require two distinct faults (Cave de Gaillac)

4772

Cass. com, September 28, 2004, Coopérative agricole la cave de la bastide de Levis v/ Société La Cave de Gaillac, n° 02-13.697 Cass. 1st civ., 19 October 2004, Mrs. X... and Company X... c/ DMBB Company and Fiat Company, n° 02-16.057 The judgments handed down by the Court of Cassation on 28 (...)

Send a message