CASE COMMENT : RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES - UNFAIR PRACTICES - FRENCH LAW - PARASITISM - LEGAL BASE

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

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. 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 acts and the definition of the conduct constituting such acts. In this case, a company owning several models of footwear entered into a transaction with one of its competitors who had committed acts of counterfeiting. At the end of this agreement, the injured competitor waived its right to take legal action, while the infringer agreed to comply with certain

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

Authors

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

Quotation

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), 11 March 2008, Concurrences N° 2-2008, Art. N° 16543, p. 128

Visites 4673

All reviews