RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES: SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE – INTERVENTION CLAUSE – SCOPE OF APPLICATION

Intervention clause : The Paris Commercial Court decides not to apply the significant imbalance rule to declarations that cannot qualify as obligations and declares void a stipulation where two contractors agree to intervene in any proceeding or action filed by a third party (Galec)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. Trib. com. Paris, 1st ch. A, 20 May 2014, RG n° 2013070793 Contractually deviating from the significant imbalance rule (n') is (not) a significant imbalance. This is essentially the double lesson that emerges from the judgment handed down by the Paris Commercial Court on 20 May 2014, concerning a stipulation in three paragraphs introduced by a major distributor with a view to (attempting to) remove the now very dreaded provision concerning "the fact of subjecting or attempting to subject a trading partner to obligations creating a significant imbalance between the rights and obligations of the parties". However, over and above the analysis of the disputed

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

  • Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines University

Quotation

Muriel Chagny, Intervention clause : The Paris Commercial Court decides not to apply the significant imbalance rule to declarations that cannot qualify as obligations and declares void a stipulation where two contractors agree to intervene in any proceeding or action filed by a third party (Galec), 20 May 2014, Concurrences N° 3-2014, Art. N° 67859, pp. 110-112

Visites 170

All reviews