French Competition Law provides a comprehensive review of the French rules relating to competition: restrictive agreements, commercial negotiation, abuses of a dominant position, procedure and merger control.

French Competition Law

Actions for unfair practices are based on civil liability and have a two-fold function, namely compensation and prevention. Thus, successful claimants may receive damages and/or an injunction granted against the perpetrator of the behavior . Depending on the claim, the court can order a number of measures as required simultaneously . The harm suffered is sometimes difficult to evaluate as a money  …

Damages or injunction

Actions for unfair practices are based on civil liability and have a two-fold function, namely compensation and prevention. Thus, successful claimants may receive damages and/or an injunction granted against the perpetrator of the behavior . Depending on the claim, the court can order a number of measures as required simultaneously . The harm suffered is sometimes difficult to evaluate as a money amount .  That amount, generally fixed in accordance with the circumstances of the case must, subject to the rules of civil liability, provide full reparation  without either loss or gain for either of the parties, so that when there is both an act of unfair competition and a fault characterized on another basis, there is no need to impose two awards of compensation . 

The courts may not award more than the amount claimed, and the plaintiff may not claim higher damages at appeal than at first instance. In certain cases, the damages awarded may be symbolic . The Court may also sometimes require its decision to be published in the press or on the radio  so as to better inform customers of the unfair practice. The Court may also order the adoption of any accompanying measure necessary to stop the practices . These may be in the form of injunctions to take certain action or to cease and desist  or may even be issued as a preventive measure before the damage has occurred .

Judgements may be accompanied by penalties for failure to comply . The continuation of acts of unfair competition after a judgment constitutes a new fault, which generates a separate injury.

CA Paris, 10 April 1995, LawLex200200001463JBJ.

CA Riom, 13 December 1954; CA Paris, 5 November 1955, D., 1955, 763; 17 November  D., 1972, 78.

Cass. com., 3 March 2009, LawLex200900000933JBJ: a Court of Appeal may not declare admissible the request to implement the coercive penalty by the assignee on the grounds that, having become the owner of the publication transferred, it is entitled to benefit from the protection attached to the latter, insofar as the penalty imposed to end unfair behavior with respect to the assignor does not constitute part of the rights transferred.

See Cass. com., 23 March 1999, LawLex200200000974JBJ, on loss of earnings; CA Rouen, 24 October 2001, LawLex200400001831JBJ, which includes in the harm related to the marketing of infringing goods the decrease in the value of the brand, the disruption caused to the commercial organization and the loss of sales.

Cass. com., 23 November 2010, LawLex201100000654JBJ: the compensation must correspond to the harm suffered and cannot be a fixed sum; 27 April 2011, LawLex201100000864JBJ: in application of the principle of full reparation, the court may not share compensation allocated to the victim between the authors of the act of unfair competition depending on the nature of their tort.

CA Rennes, 21 May 2019, LawLex201900000696JBJ, considering that the fact for a large retail undertaking to deliberately and unfairly create confusion between two competing products and appropriate, without consideration, the benefit of the investments made by its supplier by charging lower prices due to the savings made, constitutes parasitic behavior that overlaps with the alleged wrongful act of unfair commercial practices, and that it is not therefore necessary to punish the undertaking twice.

CA Paris, 9 December 1992, LawLex200200001679JBJ, where 1 French franc in symbolic damages was awarded.

Cass. com., 21 November 1972: prohibition on continuing to manufacture sell or allow to be sold models of furniture; CA Paris, 21 March 1988, LawLex200200001923JBJ: ban on using trade name; Cass. com., 6 May 1991, LawLex200200001811JBJ: order to destroy bottle and packaging copying a famous perfume; 29 June 1993, LawLex200200001632JBJ; CA Rouen, 24 October 2001, LawLex200400001831JBJ, general prohibition on selling goods carrying the copied brand; Cass. com., 3 March 2004, LawLex200400001562JBJ: ban on using a trade mark; Cass. com., 16 May 2000, LawLex200200000784JBJ: order to destroy packaging, having led to confusion; CA Douai, 5 April 2011, LawLex201100000822JBJ: injunction to cease the spreading on disparaging messages online (blog, Twitter, Facebook) and to publish online via the same media the substantive part of the judgment for three months.

Solution implied: Cass. com., 19 November 1991, LawLex200200001776JBJ, dismissing the appeal against CA Amiens, 6 October 1989, LawLex200200001896JBJ.

French Competition Law

38. Damages or injunction

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

38. Damages or injunction

Demandez un accès gratuit au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise