DISTRIBUTION - FRANCHISING - NON-REAFFILIATION OBLIGATION - DISTINCTION WITH NON COMPETITION OBLIGATION

Franchising : The French Civil Supreme Court rules that the non competition obligation has for object to limit the exercise by the franchisee of a similar activity, whereas «non-réaffiliation» obligation restricts its freedom of membership to another network (Prodim)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. In the course of the 1990s, social, commercial and then civil case law on non-competition clauses gradually became stricter: in addition to the traditional requirement of limiting the scope of the clause (e.g. Cass. com., 12 Jan. 1988, Bull. civ. IV, No 31), a condition of proportionality to the legitimate interests to be protected, assessed in relation to the subject matter of the contract, emerged (Cass. soc., 14 May 1992, D. 1992, jur. p. 350, note Y. Serra; Cass. com. 9 Nov. 1993, D. 1994, somm. p. 220, obs. Y. Serra; Cass. civ. 1re, 11 May 1999, D. 2000, somm. p. 312, obs. Y. Serra). In the field of distribution, this jurisprudential movement has

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

Quotation

Nicolas Éréséo, Franchising : The French Civil Supreme Court rules that the non competition obligation has for object to limit the exercise by the franchisee of a similar activity, whereas «non-réaffiliation» obligation restricts its freedom of membership to another network (Prodim), 28 September 2010, Concurrences N° 1-2011, Art. N° 34145, pp. 121-123

Visites 971

All reviews