French Consumer Law is a comprehensive and comparative overview of French and EU law in this field, covering: advertising, unfair commercial practices, conditions for the validity of contracts, unfair terms, product conformity, latent defects, product safety.

French Consumer Law

 Texts relating to comparative advertising protect consumers, in the strict sense of the term, and professionals and competitors. Ordinance No 2001-741 of 23 August 2001, which transposed Directive No 97/55 of October 6, 1997 on comparative advertising, deleted the reference to the concept of “consumer” in the original version of Article L. 122-1 (former Article L. 121-8) of the Consumer Code. The …

Protection of professionals and competitors

 Texts relating to comparative advertising protect consumers, in the strict sense of the term, and professionals and competitors. Ordinance No 2001-741 of 23 August 2001, which transposed Directive No 97/55 of October 6, 1997 on comparative advertising, deleted the reference to the concept of “consumer” in the original version of Article L. 122-1 (former Article L. 121-8) of the Consumer Code. The choice made by the French legislator is also enshrined in Directive No 2006/114 of 12 December 2006, which seeks to protect professionals and competitors against misleading advertising and unlawful comparative advertising .

In so doing, the Ordinance of 23 August 2001 put an end to a controversy which originated in the very title of the Law of 18 January 1992: the words “enhancing consumer protection” might imply that the law intended above all to defend consumers against the maneuvers of professionals. Some case law adopted this literal interpretation and dismissed the actions undertaken by professionals concerned by the advertising , even if some decisions have admitted the application of the text when the operator was not an advertising professional . The controversy subsequently extended to advertising intended for physicians, for medicinal products subject to medical prescription. Indeed, some judges considered that the special regulations of the Public Health Code, which establishes a clear distinction between advertising to the “public” and that to prescribing physicians , removed the latter from the scope of application of the Consumer Code , unless the advertising was for over-the-counter products and not for medicines . Nevertheless, the Court of Appeal of Versailles, by a series of decisive judgments, clearly indicated that the regulation of advertising for medicinal products under the Public Health Code did not prevent the application of the provisions of the Consumer Code in the area of comparative advertising .

In other areas, before the adoption of the Ordinance of 23 August 2001, the trial judges considered that there was no need to distinguish between the recipients of the advertisement. In fact, the legislator did not specify that the text would have the effect of regulating relations between professionals and non-professionals . Therefore, it is irrelevant whether the advertising is intended for professional retail buyers when these professionals are the prescribers of the products concerned with consumers and that the pitch is not exclusively intended for internal use . This approach is now enshrined in the texts .

 Misleading advertising to consumers is now covered by Directive No 2005/29 on unfair commercial practices.

  T. com. Paris, 14 September 1992, LawLex200200001713JBJ, advertising to advertisers and comparing the market shares of different magazines.

  T. com. Paris, 16 May 1995, LawLex200200001453JBJ.

 Internal Security Code, Articles L. 5122-6 and L. 5122-9.

   CA Paris, 23 October 1996, LawLex200300001354JBJ: rejection of the qualification of comparative advertising in respect of a comparative table of medicinal products intended not for the public but for doctors; T. com. Nanterre, 21 April 1997, LawLex200300001350JBJ: for the trial judges, comparative advertising "published exclusively in the medical press or presented to doctors by visual aids, is not intended for doctors as potential consumers but as prescribers"; 19 December 1997, LawLex200300001345JBJ. 

   CA Versailles, 15 November  2001, LawLex200200000594JBJ, advertising urinary catheters to doctors.

   CA Versailles, 3 April 1998, LawLex200300001342JBJ; 18 February 1999, LawLex200300001970JBJ; 27 April  2000, LawLex200200000797JBJ; 11 May 2000, LawLex200300001887JBJ.

  TGI Paris, 18 November 1992, LawLex200200001686JBJ; CA Versailles, 10 September 1998, LawLex200200001094JBJ; CA Bordeaux, 22 November  2000, LawLex200300001258JBJ; CA Versailles, 9 December 2004, LawLex200600001214JBJ: the appeal judges retain the qualification of comparative advertising for an advertisement in the form of a comparative table of prices and performance of various printers, as the grid was distributed to dealers.

 CA Grenoble, 11 December 2008, LawLex201200001013JBJ.

  See, however, CA Douai, 11 September 2008, LawLex201200001047JBJ, holding that Articles L. 122-1 and

L. 122-2 of the Consumer Code are intended to protect consumers and do not apply between professionals.

French Consumer Law

286. Protection of professionals and competitors

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

286. Protection of professionals and competitors

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