CASE COMMENT : DISTRIBUTION – EXCLUSIVE AGREEMENT - SALE OF BUSINESS – NO COMPETITION – ONLINE SALES

Sale of Buniness: The Amiens Court of Appeal holds that the use of a website to reach customers within the scope of prohibition of a non-recovery and non-solicitation provision, forbidden by contract, is not a breach of contract in the absence of an express provision that qualifies it as such (Chermes/Maison Richet)

La question du traitement juridique des ventes en ligne et incidemment de la délicate qualification des e-boutiques est, désormais, classiquement illustrée par l’interdiction faite aux promoteurs de réseaux de distribution d’interdire, de manière absolue, les reventes passives de leurs distributeurs à partir de leurs propres sites de vente en ligne (cf. notamment Cour d’appel de Paris, 31 janvier 2013, RG n° 08/23812, Affaire Pierre Fabre). Elle est plus rarement envisagée, de manière au demeurant quelque peu surprenante, au travers des clauses de non-concurrence post-contractuelle, de non-réaffiliation, de non-rétablissement voire de non-sollicitation de clientèle. La matière que constitue cette concurrence interdite est, pourtant, un terrain de réflexion propice à l’analyse de la qualification

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

Anne-Cécile Martin, Sale of Buniness: The Amiens Court of Appeal holds that the use of a website to reach customers within the scope of prohibition of a non-recovery and non-solicitation provision, forbidden by contract, is not a breach of contract in the absence of an express provision that qualifies it as such (Chermes/Maison Richet), 23 May 2013, Concurrences Review N° 4-2013, Art. N° 59249, p. 96

Visites 118

All reviews