CASE COMMENTS: DISTRIBUTION – THIRD PARTY PLATFORM – INTERDICTION OF RESALE – PROCEEDINGS FOR INTERIM RELIEF – RESTRICTION OF COMPETITION

Third party platform: The French Supreme Court rules a few weeks after the opinion of Advocate General Wahl that a prohibition imposed to a distributor to resale its products on online third-party platforms does not constitute in itself a hardcore restriction of competition (Caudalie / eNova Santé)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. After a solution for online sales that seemed as quick, in both directions of haste and summary, as final (Paris 31 January 2013, D 2013, p 887 note DF, epilogue of the Pierre Fabre Cosmétique case), here is the debate on the control of distribution via the Internet relaunched by a decision of the Court of Cassation and the conclusions of the Advocate General before the European Court of Justice. The question put to both jurisdictions was basically the same: can the promoter of selective distribution prohibit the resale of its products through a third party electronic platform? The Court of Cassation responded positively by censuring a judgment handed

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 of Montpellier

Quotation

Didier Ferrier, Third party platform: The French Supreme Court rules a few weeks after the opinion of Advocate General Wahl that a prohibition imposed to a distributor to resale its products on online third-party platforms does not constitute in itself a hardcore restriction of competition (Caudalie / eNova Santé), 13 September 2017, Concurrences N° 4-2017, Art. N° 85150, pp. 110-112

Visites 285

All reviews