Transparency: The French Supreme Court ruled that a supplier is liable if it has not made use of its freedom to refuse to sell products to a company and has entered into negotiations with the latter on the basis of sales conditions applicable to a category of buyers to which it did not belong (Cooper / Mon Courtier en pharmacie)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. While it regularly attracts the attention of competition authorities who apprehend, on the basis of anti-competitive practices law, certain deferred entry agreements or even acts of disparagement (see also Aut. conc., 16-D-01 of January 20, 2016 on practices referred to in Article L. 420-1 of the French Commercial Code implemented in the non-reimbursable drug distribution sector; Adde opinion 19-A-08 of April 14, 2019 relating to the sectors of distribution of medicines in towns and private medical biology,) the pharmaceutical sector is also of interest to the law of unfair practices, as illustrated by two recent rulings of the Cour de cassation. These

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, Transparency: The French Supreme Court ruled that a supplier is liable if it has not made use of its freedom to refuse to sell products to a company and has entered into negotiations with the latter on the basis of sales conditions applicable to a category of buyers to which it did not belong (Cooper / Mon Courtier en pharmacie), 28 September 2022, Concurrences N° 4-2022, Art. N° 109658, www.concurrences.com

Visites 99

All reviews