*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. – Cass. com, January 19, 2010, Groupe Expert v. Spouse C., n° 09-10980, published in the Bulletin More than twenty years after its adoption, the law known as the "Doubin" law, now set out in article L. 330-3 C. Com. still gives rise to novel questions, as is apparent from the judgment delivered by the Commercial Chamber on 19 January 2010 (Cass. com., 19 Jan. 2010, Appeal No 09-10980, Contracts, conc. consom., No 4-2010, comm. 92, note by M. Malaurie-Vignal). At the origin of the dispute, spouses who were members of a cooperative of retail traders had been sued by a bank as joint and several guarantors of the company they managed, which had been placed in
CASE COMMENTS: DISTRIBUTION - OBLIGATION OF INFORMATION (ART. L. 330-3 C. COM.) - CONDITION OF EXCLUSIVITY OR QUASI-EXCLUSIVITY - CONSIDERATION OF CONTRACTUAL PRODUCTS (YES) - OBLIGATION TO REALIZE A STUDY OF THE LOCAL MARKET (NO) - RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR OF THE STUDIES (YES) - REQUIREMENT OF SERIOUSNESS AND SINCERITY
Application of Article L. 330-3 C. com.: The Court of Cassation rules that the possibility for the distributor to exercise competing activities cannot justify application of Article L. 330-3 C. com. and recalls that if this provision does not require the establishment of a local market study or a projected sales study, the debtor of the information who supplied such documents can nevertheless engage his liability (Groupe Expert)
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.