CASE COMMENT: RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES - SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION NETWORK

Selective distribution network: The Paris Court of Appeal rules that the absence of a secured network cannot hinder the network’s validity (La Roche Posay)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. CA Paris, 5ème ch. A, 8 June 2005, LCJ Diffusion v/ La Roche Posay and Cosmétique Active France In accordance with Article L.442-6-I-6° of the French Commercial Code, the fact that a trader "directly or indirectly participates in the violation of the prohibition of resale outside the network by a distributor bound by a selective or exclusive distribution agreement exempted under the applicable rules of competition law" engages his liability and obliges him to compensate for the loss suffered. The 5th Chamber of the Paris Court of Appeal has just condemned, on the basis of this provision, LCJ Diffusion, at the request of La Roche Posay, a manufacturer of

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

Mary-Claude Mitchell, Selective distribution network: The Paris Court of Appeal rules that the absence of a secured network cannot hinder the network’s validity (La Roche Posay), 8 June 2005, Concurrences N° 3-2005, Art. N° 1082, pp. 86-87

Visites 6125

All reviews