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 regulation of deception and falsification arose from the discontent of traders due to the unfair practices by some competitors who deceived buyers as to the conformity of the good sold. The Law of 1 August 1905 on the repression of fraud in the sale of goods and the falsification of foodstuffs and agricultural products  supplemented the mechanism for the protection of buyers provided for in the Civil Code  by penalizing the lack of fairness in the presentation of the thing sold, the information relating to it (deception) or its manufacture (falsification) . Despite the different constituent elements and scopes , deception and falsification are subject to the same procedure and are punishable by the same penalties.

The Hamon Law has significantly strengthened the repression of these two offenses. In particular, the two-year prison sentence is now necessarily combined with a fine, whose ceiling has been increased. The text also provides for an increase in the penalties when, for example, the falsified goods are harmful for human and animal health or the deception makes the use of the goods dangerous for their health. The Hamon Law also introduced into the Consumer Code provisions relating to inspection and seizure operations and letters rogatory issued in the context of deceit and falsification and to the powers of the DGCCRF in judicial proceedings.

Then, Law No 2015-992 of 17 August 2015 on the energy transition for green growth  established a new offense of planned obsolescence  sanctioned by a two-year prison sentence and a fine of EUR 300,000.

However, it is reasonable to question the compatibility of the legislation on deception and falsification with Directive No 2005/29 on unfair commercial practices, which, in the interests of maximum harmonization, which, in principle, deprives any other system for the repression of unfair commercial practices of all effectiveness.

  Mainly the theory of vitiated consent and warranty against latent defects.

  These similar infringements, which are often indiscriminately penalized by case law, may constitute both offenses and minor offenses for which proof of the moral element is not required.

  According to Article L. 413-1 of the Consumer Code, the scope of falsification covers only foodstuffs, beverages and agricultural or natural products.

  Defined in Article L. 441-2 (former Article L. 213-4-1) of the Consumer Code.

537. Criminal repression of non-conformity