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

 The essential quality of a thing may be linked to its capacity to fulfil its intended use. The solution applies to both immoveable and moveable property. The construcibility of a plot of land  or the living area of a house are some of their essential qualities . The “main” function of a mobile home lies in its mobility , but the proper functioning of the internal and independent water system is also, according to the judges , an essential element of the use normally expected of this type of residence. The ability to move pallets around a warehouse is an essential quality of a forklift truck . Similarly, the legitimate use that can be expected of a boat is to be able to board people without endangerment: the buyer who acquires a boat with an excess weight of more than 45% depriving him of this function, has grounds to claim the cancellation of the sale on the basis of mistake . A mistake as to quality of wheat purchased, which has become unfit for consumption, is also liable to fall within the scope of Article 1133 of the Civil Code .

Mistake is also a cause of nullity when it concerns the layout and use of the property sold, in consideration of which the parties have contracted . Often, the misunderstanding by the person invoking mistake is due to wrong information, which may result from inaccuracies , a lack of information , or from a more or less misleading presentation . Mistake then falls within the limits of fraudulent non-disclosure, non-compliance with the seller's information obligation, or even unfair commercial practices. For example, an individual who, believing that he is subscribing to an offer for the rental of computer equipment and maintenance of his website, for an amount of EUR 180 /month for 4 years, has in fact only contracted for the rental service, can obtain the cancellation of the contract for mistake, as the presentation within the same agreement of these separate services created a significant risk of confusion . This is also the case for a victim whose consent was vitiated by the provision of inaccurate information on the actual cost of mobile telephone subscriptions, which is an essential feature of the service offered and a decisive reason for his decision to switch operators . However, the mistake caused by a so-called lack of information must, in order to justify the cancellation of the sale, have the consequence that the device sold is not usable or is of very limited utility . 

The compatibility of one object with another can be an essential quality. Thus, according to the Court of Cassation , the purchaser who purchases together and for an overall amount, two items of agricultural machinery which prove to be incompatible, is entitled to have the sale declared null and void for mistake, since for him, given the circumstances of the case, the essential quality of one lay in its adaptability to the other.

Finally, the ability of the thing to fulfill the intended use can also be described as an essential characteristic of intangible property. When a sale has no purpose other than to transfer, unbeknownst to the transferees, an undertaking already deprived of a large part of its assets and unlikely to be profitable, the consent of the transferees is vitiated by a mistake as to  the essential qualities of the shares, as the company transferred, which in reality cannot achieve its corporate purpose and pursue a profitable economic activity, no longer has any usefulness for them .

Cass. 3e civ., 21 June 1995, LawLex200500006056JBJ: insofar as the fact that the land is unable to be built on is not an inherent defect of the land at the time of sale, but results from the expiry of the ten-year legal term of the subdivision order, and the purchaser, who is not unaware of any of the legal conditions governing the transaction and is aware of the precarious or time-limited nature of the ability to build on the land acquired, is not entitled to rely on a mistake as to the essential qualities of the thing sold.

CA Agen, 22 November 2023, LawLex202300014033JBJ.

 CA Nîmes, 27 June 2013, LawLex201400000388JBJ: the buyer is justified in seeking the cancellation of the purchase of his home cinema for mistake, when neither the brochure nor the contract clearly indicated that this equipment did not allow the activation of high definition on the CanalSat digital package, the reason for his purchase.

  CA Paris, 28 March 2013, LawLex201400000404JBJ; CA Versailles, 6 June 2013, LawLex201400000396JBJ: the professional buyer, a layman in computer technology, who, believing he is buying billing software, finds himself in possession of a simple tool to cost the repair of damaged vehicles, can seek the annulment of the contract for mistake, when the presentation of the software on the Internet could legitimately lead him to believe that it could meet the expected utility. 

 CA Montpellier, 28 March 2017, LawLex201700000731JBJ.

 CA Paris, 26 October 2012, LawLex201300000507JBJ: a company that accuses its supplier of having failed to inform it that the device sold could not function without the authorization of the CNIL, cannot claim that the lack of information and advice from the seller is the source of a defect of consent justifying cancellation of the sale, when the thing sold - in this case the software and its accessory - operates with a PIN code, the biometric option requiring an administrative authorization from the CNIL, finally refused, only representing 10% of the total price.

  Cass. com., 13 March 2012, LawLex201200000977JBJ.

 Cass. com., 1 October 1991, LawLex200500006053JBJ and 7 February 1995, LawLex200500006054JBJ.

 CA Paris, 6 July 2001, LawLex200500009153JBJ.

  CA Paris, 8 July 2001, LawLex200500009153JBJ.

 CA Colmar, 27 April 2010, LawLex201200000748JBJ.

 CA Caen, 26 March 2013, LawLex201300000495JBJ.

  CA Versailles, 27 October 2011, LawLex201200000800JBJ.

 CA Metz, 15 December 2011, LawLex201200000750JBJ.

 CA Metz, 15 December 2011, LawLex201200000750JBJ:  buyers who, as a result of the seller-installer's failure to comply with its precontractual information obligation, contracted without knowing if all the furniture and appliances they wanted to put in their future kitchen were compatible with its size, and more generally if their project was feasible, given that the seller did not show the dimensions of the kitchen on the plan of their property to be built, can claim the cancellation of the sale for mistake as to the substantial qualities. The solution is open to criticism since the possibility of installing the kitchen in question was not free of risks, which in principle renders the fault of the errans inexcusable.

 CA Paris, 26 October 2012, LawLex201300000507JBJ.

360. Usefulness or function of the thing sold