CASE COMMENTS : RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES – SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE – CIVIL ACTION – MINISTER REQUEST – CIVIL FINE – DISTRIBUTION/RETAIL

Significant imbalance: The Commercial Court of Meaux imposes a “civil” fine on a retailer because of the significant imbalance of two provisions of its annual agreement with its suppliers (Ministry of Economy/EMC Distribution)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. This is the second decision handed down by the Meaux Commercial Court as part of the series of writs issued by the Minister of the Economy in the autumn of 2009 against nine general and specialist retail chains. Following its Provera decision of December 6, 2011 (Concurrences No. 1-2012, p. 130, obs. Mr. Chagny) the Commercial Court of Meaux therefore rules again on the question of significant imbalance. The Tribunal de Meaux confirms its position as to the admissibility of the action of the Minister for the Economy in the absence of prior information of the suppliers concerned. Following the example of the Lille Commercial Court (Concurrences n° 4-2011,

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

Mireille Dany, Significant imbalance: The Commercial Court of Meaux imposes a “civil” fine on a retailer because of the significant imbalance of two provisions of its annual agreement with its suppliers (Ministry of Economy/EMC Distribution), 24 January 2012, Concurrences N° 2-2012, Art. N° 45659, pp. 97-98

Visites 462

All reviews