CASE COMMENTS : DISTRIBUTION – SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION – COSMETIC PRODUCTS – PRESENCE OF A QUALIFIED PHARMACIST AT THE OUTLET – DISPROPORTION (YES) – RESTRICTION OF COMPETITION (YES)

Selective distribution: The Toulouse Court of Appeal qualifies as disproportionate and likely to distort competition the clause of a selective distribution agreement requiring the presence, physical and permanent, of a pharmacist who holds a degree at the outlet of cosmetic products (Pierre Fabre)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. Curiously, selective distribution, which was recognised by judges more than 30 years ago before being recognised by the competition authorities, now appears to be more severely appreciated by the former than by the latter. Following the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union condemning the clause prohibiting selected distributors from marketing cosmetic products over the internet (13 October 2011, Case C-439/09 ; Concurrences No 1 2012, Chronique D. Ferré), the Toulouse Court of Appeal condemned the clause requiring

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

  • University of Montpellier

Quotation

Didier Ferrier, Selective distribution: The Toulouse Court of Appeal qualifies as disproportionate and likely to distort competition the clause of a selective distribution agreement requiring the presence, physical and permanent, of a pharmacist who holds a degree at the outlet of cosmetic products (Pierre Fabre), 17 January 2012, Concurrences N° 2-2012, Art. N° 45641, pp. 87-88

Visites 887

All reviews