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

When the repair or replacement of non-conforming goods is not possible, new Article L. 217-14  of the Consumer Code, introduced by Ordinance No 2021-1247, provides for the compensation in value of the damage resulting from the lack of conformity. The buyer is offered the possibility of claiming either the reduction of the price or the cancellation of the contract. However, this is a subsidiary rig …

Compensation in value

When the repair or replacement of non-conforming goods is not possible, new Article L. 217-14  of the Consumer Code, introduced by Ordinance No 2021-1247, provides for the compensation in value of the damage resulting from the lack of conformity. The buyer is offered the possibility of claiming either the reduction of the price or the cancellation of the contract. However, this is a subsidiary right . Previously, former Article L. 217-10 specifically provided for the means of compensation in terms of value, whereby the impossibility of repairing or replacing the non-conforming goods had to be proven . As the legal guarantee of conformity of goods previously covered the sale of live animals, the Court of Cassation had thus considered that such an impossibility was characterized in the case of the sale of a puppy suffering from a hereditary cataract with severe visual impairment, since it concerns a unique and irreplaceable living being, intended to receive the affection of its master, with no economic purpose . This was also the case where a series of interventions by the seller-installer and their manifest ineffectiveness characterized its inability to render the good compliant with its intended use and demonstrate the impossibility of the repair within the meaning of the article  when a vehicle purchased had only two-wheel instead of the four-wheel drive specified on the purchase order and could not be converted into a four-wheel drive vehicle, and the proposed replacement vehicle being of a higher quality required an additional financial contribution  or when the seller and repairer has gone into receivership and ceased all activity .

The consumer could also ask for compensation in value:

-  when the repair or replacement could not be implemented within a period  of one month of the buyer's claim  ; if it is found that the consumer cannot prove that the seller has exceeded the time-limit of one month , he could not seek the cancellation of the contract or the reduction of the price ;

-  when the repair or replacement of the good was unable to be carried out without major inconvenience to the buyer, taking into account the nature of the good or the use he seeks  ; the interest of the consumer was clearly given preference.

Ordinance No 2021-1247 on the legal guarantee of conformity of digital goods, content and services has modified the situation. From now on, the consumer may request a reduction in the price of the goods or the cancellation of the contract in the following cases: 

1° if the professional refuses to bring the goods into conformity; 

2° if the bringing into conformity takes place more than thirty days after the consumer's request or if it causes him/her a major inconvenience; 

3° if the consumer definitively bears the cost of returning or removing the non-conforming goods, or installing the replacement or repaired goods; 

4° if the non-conformity of the goods persists despite the attempt to bring them into conformity. 

The consumer may request compensation in value “when the lack of conformity is so serious that it justifies an immediate reduction in price or rescission of the contract”. In this case, the consumer is not obliged to first ask for the repair or replacement of the goods.

Where the buyer opts for rescission, new Article L. 217-16 provides that the goods are to be returned at the expense of the seller, who is also required to reimburse  the price paid to the consumer as well as any other benefit received under the contract. If the lack of conformity relates only to certain goods delivered under the contract of sale, the consumer is entitled to rescission of the contract in respect of all the goods, “if he cannot reasonably be expected to keep only the conforming goods”.

Article L. 217-14 (like former Article L. 217-10) of the Consumer Code specifies that the cancellation of the sale cannot be declared if the non-conformity is minor, i.e. if it does not present a certain gravity . Therefore, even if the seller has not carried out the repairs within one month of the buyer's request, the buyer cannot demand rescission of the sale in the presence of minor non-conformities . Thus, the courts have ruled that the malfunctioning of a new vehicle's operating assistance system constitutes a minor defect in conformity that does not justify rescinding the sale, provided that it can be repaired and that the failure or absence of such a device does not impede the use of the vehicle or affect its safety, unless the consumer's state of health magnifies the importance of such an option and renders its absence genuinely harmful, and provided that the essential nature of the said option is covered by the contract . On the other hand, rescission of the sale is justified when, sixteen days after its acquisition, a vehicle is no longer able to run and its repair amounts to 67% of the purchase price of the vehicle . The seriousness of the non-conformity is assessed on a case-by-case basis and subjectively . The sellers of a vehicle cannot rely on a non-adversarial expert report according to which the vehicle is not roadworthy, in order to support their demand for the cancellation of the sale  . Some courts have held that non-conformities affecting a vehicle which can be remedied by work amounting to one third of the price of the vehicle are not sufficiently serious to justify the cancellation of the sale , while others have not hesitated impose rescission in such cases . The Court of Cassation has ruled that the delivery of a vehicle affected by small white spots caused by gravel impacts which removed the protective varnish and revealed a layer of primer, to a purchaser who, in view of the mentions appearing on the order form relating to a so-called “polish” finish, attached particular importance to the aesthetic appearance of the vehicle's bodywork, characterizes a breach by the seller of his legal obligation of conformity which is sufficiently serious as to justify the cancellation of the sale, all the more so when the purchaser asked for the repair of the vehicle and received no response .  The lack of conformity relating to the power of the purchased vehicle is not a minor defect and gives the right to the reciprocal restitution of the price by the seller and of the vehicle by the purchaser when the repair or replacement of the vehicle are impossible . The lack of proper marking of the delivered goods contravenes the applicable regulations and prevents them from being sold, and is also sufficiently serious to justify rescission of the contract of sale .  In case of cancellation of the sale for breach of the seller's obligation of conformity, the Court of Cassation considers that the burden of insurance costs, related to the use of the property enjoyed by the buyer, is incumbent only on the seller .

However, the reduction in price can be obtained, even in the case of minor defects, if the conditions laid down in the text are met . Under new Article L. 217-15, it must be “proportional to the difference between the value of the good delivered and the value of that good absent the lack of conformity”.

See CA Douai, 25 February 2013, LawLex201300000573JBJ, clarifying that consumer protection grants the consumer only a subsidiary right to rescission of the contract, failing repair or replacement, and if the lack of conformity is not of minor importance.

Consumer Code, former Article. L. 217-10: “If repair or replacement of the good is impossible, the buyer may return the good and have the price refunded or keep the good and have part of the price returned. The same option is open to him/her: 1° If the solution requested, proposed or agreed upon in application of Article L. 217-9 cannot be implemented within a time-limit of one month following the buyer's complaint; 2° or if that solution cannot be implemented without major inconvenience for the buyer, given the nature of the good and the use he/she is seeking. However, the sale may not be rescinded if the lack of conformity is minor”. See CA Nancy, 31 May 2010, LawLex201300000634JBJ; CA Metz, 13 January 2011, LawLex201300000544JBJ, which recalls of the need for the seller wishing to fight this alternative option to show that the goods can be repaired. CA Aix-en-Provence, 20 March 2024, LawLex202400002623JBJ: pursuant to Article L. 217-10 of the Consumer Code, in the version applicable to such disputes, according to which the buyer may return the goods and be refunded the price (or keep the goods and receive a partial refund) if their replacement cannot be achieved without major inconvenience for the buyer, taking into account the nature of the goods and their intended use, the sale must be declared null and void in its entirety, if the repair of the affected goods alone, due to their stained leather covering, would not produce a color identical to the original.

 CA Nancy, 7 June 2012, LawLex201300000571JBJ, concerning the defect affecting a used car, the repair of the vehicle not presenting a major disadvantage for the purchaser insofar as he never stopped using it.

Consumer Code, Art. L. 217-7: "The reimbursement to the consumer of the sums owed by the seller under this sub-section shall be made on receipt of the goods or of proof of their return by the consumer and at the latest within the following fourteen days.

The seller shall reimburse these sums using the same means of payment as the one used by the consumer at the time of the conclusion of the contract, unless the latter expressly agrees otherwise, and in any case without any additional cost.

   CA Douai, 12 November 2012, LawLex201300000782JBJ, on the lack of proof by the applicant of the seriousness of the defect that could justify the termination of the contract.

  CA  Nancy, 7 June 2012, LawLex201300000571JBJ.

CA Aix-en-Provence, 19 September 2023, LawLex202300011753JBJ.

 CA Grenoble, 11 September 2018, LawLex201800001315JBJ.

CA Aix-en-Provence, 3 November 2011, LawLex201600000141JBJ, considering that the buyer is entitled to refuse the installation of photovoltaic panels manufactured by a Canadian company and to request the cancellation of the sale, when his very precise order was for the delivery of products of German manufacture, with the exception of identical or even more efficient equipment, since this lack of conformity cannot be regarded as minor as he contracted, in the interests of safety, in consideration of the high reputation of the German group in this sector, unlike the Canadian company that has its solar cells manufactured in China;  CA Toulouse, 3 June 2014, LawLex201600000135JBJ, granting the application for the court-ordered cancellation of the sale and the award of damages given the difference in tint and grain of the kitchen elements delivered in relation to the contractual provisions, which cannot be considered as a minor lack of conformity, since they make the installation of the kitchen impossible;  CA Paris, 13 April 2012, LawLex201200000978JBJ, denying the buyer the right to refuse the repair by the installation by the seller of a veneer (in plywood), on the sides of the kitchen elements ordered, of the same tint as their façades (solid oak), although the indications on the purchase order do not make it possible to determine the color, since Article L. 211-10 of the Consumer Code makes the cancellation of the sale conditional on the impossibility to repair or replace the good sold and does not authorize it for a minor defect.

CA Caen, 6 February 2020, LawLex202000000211JBJ.

 CA Nancy, 13 December 2012, LawLex201400000665JBJ.

CA Nancy, 9 June 2011, LawLex201300000554JBJ, holding that the cancellation of the sale must be declared, in accordance with the buyer's request, if the vehicle has a major lack of conformity, since the repair would cost EUR 2,673 while the vehicle was purchased for EUR 6,900 and was not repaired within the period of one month.

  Cass. 1re civ., 9 December 2015, LawLex201600000096JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 24 October 2018, LawLex201900000103JBJ.

CA Lyon, 8 September 2022, LawLex202200008049JBJ.

CA Paris, 30 October 2019, LawLex201900001303JBJ: the lack of proper marking of the delivered goods, inasmuch as it contravenes the regulations in force and prevents its marketing, is sufficiently serious to justify the rescission of the sales contract.

See, for a similar decision, Case C-32/12 Soledad Duarte Huero, Judgment of 3 October 2013, LawLex201300001443JBJ, holding that Directive No 1999/44 is opposed to the legislation of a Member State which, when a consumer is entitled to an adequate reduction in the price of a property fixed by the contract of sale but merely applies to a court for the cancellation of the sale, which cannot be obtained to do the minor nature of the lack of conformity, does not enable the national court to grant such a reduction ex officio. Article 13 (5) of Directive No 2019/771 also precludes recourse to termination of the contract if the lack of conformity is only minor.

 CA Aix-en-Provence, 12 March 2015, LawLex201600000125JBJ; CA Toulouse, 10 September 2018, LawLex201800001314JBJ: insofar as none of the interventions carried out were able to remedy the problem identified, the seller and the manufacturer being able to propose only a provisional repair which would require periodic rectification without specifying the frequency of this rectification, the lack of conformity in question, which is not a minor one, justifies the cancellation of the sale in accordance with the choice expressed by the consumer who bought the vehicle, irrespective of the clear disproportion between the cost of the provisional repair and the purchase value of the vehicle to be returned.

CA Caen, 8 February 2022, lawLex202200000993JBJ.

CA Poitiers, 3 October 2023, LawLex202300012177JBJ.

CA Paris, 20 December 2019, LawLex202000000007JBJ, specifying that the period of one month following the buyer's complaint, imposed by Article L. 217-10 of the Consumer Code, for the seller to implement the proposed solution (replacement or repair) does not distinguish between the manufacturing deadline and the delivery deadline, so that when the seller offers to replace the disputed carpet, which cannot be repaired, within a period of 12 weeks, 4 weeks being devoted to manufacturing and 8 to delivery, the seller is in breach of its obligations.

CA Nancy, 9 June 2011, LawLex201300000554JBJ, regarding the automotive sector; CA Paris, 20 December 2019, LawLex202000000007JBJ: the consumer is entitled to return the non-compliant goods and to have the price refunded, when the seller offers to replace them within a time-limit of 12 weeks, whereas according to former Article L. 217-10 of the Consumer Code, the seller has only one month to make a new delivery to the buyer's home; CA Caen, 6 February 2020, LawLex202000000211JBJ: the consumer is entitled to ask for the cancellation of the sale when the seller's failure to act makes it manifestly impossible to repair or replace the goods delivered, which were not able to fulfill  their essential function, i.e., the production of continuous domestic electricity, and the lack of conformity was reported within six months of the delivery of the goods. See also. CA Rennes, 14 December 2018, LawLex201800001955JBJ: the supply of a wind generator kit, whose essential characteristics i.e. the production of energy and the expected financial gain, do not correspond to the estimates announced in the documents (order form, balance sheet and annex) provided to the purchaser, the installed device having defects in design and capacity to produce, characterizes a breach of the seller's obligation of delivery of goods in conformity, which justifies the rescission of the contract.

CA Paris, 10 April 2014, LawLex201600000128JBJ: the buyer's request for a cancellation of the sale cannot be granted if the lack of conformity affecting the vehicle sold is minor and the seller has proposed to remedy the situation as soon as possible.

   CA Fort-de-France, 27 April 2012, LawLex201300000558JBJ.

French Consumer Law

526. Compensation in value

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

526. Compensation in value

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