CASE COMMENTS: RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES – CIVIL PENALTY – TRANSMISSION TO THE ACQUIRING COMPANY

Preliminary ruling on constitutionnality: The French Constitutional Court declares the third sentence of Article L. 442-6, III, paragraph 2 of the Commercial Code (concerning the civil fine) conform to the Constitution (ITM Alimentaire international)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. On 18 February 2016, the Constitutional Council was seized of a priority constitutionality question referred by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation (ruling no. 286) because of its serious nature. Formulated on the occasion of the appeal against a decision of the Paris Court of Appeal handed down on 11 March 2015, the priority constitutionality question transmitted was the following: "the provisions of Article L. 446-2, III of the Commercial Code in reality L. 442-6 III, as interpreted by the case-law as authorising the imposition of a civil fine on a legal person to which an undertaking has been transferred, are contrary to the principle that

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

  • University Littoral-Cote d’Opale (Boulogne/Mer)

Quotation

Valérie Durand, Preliminary ruling on constitutionnality: The French Constitutional Court declares the third sentence of Article L. 442-6, III, paragraph 2 of the Commercial Code (concerning the civil fine) conform to the Constitution (ITM Alimentaire international), 18 May 2016, Concurrences Nº 4-2016, Art. N° 82069, pp. 127-128

Visites 132

All reviews