ALERTS: UNFAIR COMMERCIAL PRACTICES - SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE - REFORM

Significant imbalance: The Paris Court of Appeal issues three decisions on some aspects of significant imbalance (Garage D. / NBB Lease; Central Optics / La Poste; Sodicob 2000 / Haribo Ricqles Zan)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. There are three decisions on significant imbalance, each dealing with different elements of this system, hence their successive treatment. First case (December 18, 2020) - No commercial partnership Facts Following malfunctions of the computer equipment supplied under a finance lease, the client, a garage owner, terminated the lease and stopped the automatic debits. He was summoned by the finance company for payment of the unpaid rent and the rent due until the end of the contract, in addition to various other sums. Problem The garage owner then based his request for termination, in the alternative, on the existence of a significant imbalance between

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

  • Centre de Droit de l’Entreprise (Montpellier)

Quotation

Sibylle Chaudouet, Significant imbalance: The Paris Court of Appeal issues three decisions on some aspects of significant imbalance (Garage D. / NBB Lease; Central Optics / La Poste; Sodicob 2000 / Haribo Ricqles Zan), 20 January 2021, Concurrences N° 1-2021, Art. N° 99904, www.concurrences.com

Visites 27

All reviews