CASE COMMENTS: DISTRIBUTION – INDEMNITY FOR TERMINATION OF CONTRACT – IMPUTABILITY OF THE TERMINATION – BURDEN OF PROOF

Commercial agency: The French Supreme Court holds that the principal who does not allow his agent to exercise his activity and does not respond to a formal notice from his agent to continue the contractual relationship, is responsible for the termination of the contract (Celinho / DGPP)

Si le régime protecteur spécifique applicable à l’agent commercial prévoit par principe, en cas de cessation de ses relations avec son mandant, le droit à une indemnité dite “de cessation de contrat” (article L. 134-12 C. com.), il existe néanmoins des circonstances dans lesquelles l’agent n’en bénéficie pas. L’article L. 134-13 2° C. com. prévoit ainsi que l’indemnité de cessation de contrat n’est pas due dans le cas où “la cessation du contrat résulte de l’initiative de l’agent, à moins que cette cessation ne soit justifiée par des circonstances imputables au mandant”.

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

Dominique Ferré, Commercial agency: The French Supreme Court holds that the principal who does not allow his agent to exercise his activity and does not respond to a formal notice from his agent to continue the contractual relationship, is responsible for the termination of the contract (Celinho / DGPP), 21 June 2016, Concurrences Review Nº 4-2016, Art. N° 82053, p. 109

Visites 70

All reviews