Cass. crim., 19 septembre 2007, n° 07-82.653

Cass. crim., 19 septembre 2007, n° 06-81.129

Cass. 1re civ., 19 septembre 2007, n° 06-16.964

Cass. 1re civ., 19 septembre 2007, n° 06-16.419

Cass. 1re civ., 19 septembre 2007, n° 06-16.755

Cass. 1re civ., 19 septembre 2007, n° 06-17.408

CA Paris, 14e ch. A, 19 septembre 2007, n° 06/15422

Cass. 3e civ., 19 septembre 2007, n° 06-16.820

Cass. crim., 19 septembre 2007, n° 06-89.199

Cass. 1re civ., 19 septembre 2007, n° 06-11.814

CA Paris, 14e ch. A, 19 septembre 2007, n° 07/03177

Cass. 3e civ., 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-15.220

Cass. com., 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-13.097

Cass. crim., 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-89.496

Cass. com., 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-13.824

EC, September 18, 2007, No M.4696

Le fait de se prétendre "n° 1 de la vente de pneus motos en France", sans être en mesure de le prouver, est constitutif de publicité trompeuse.

CA Versailles, 12e ch. sect. 1, 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-04520

Dans la mesure où le contrat de sous-traitance se borne à interdire tout démarchage et prestations de maintenance sur des matériels Agfa neufs ou d'occasion, le sous-traitant reste libre d'effectuer des prestations de maintenance pour son propre compte en dehors des départements concernés par le contrat de sous-traitance. 

CA Versailles, 12e ch. sect. 1, 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-04868

Le maintien dans les lieux du franchisé, dont le contrat de location-gérance a été résilié par le franchiseur sans que le contrat de distribution soit rompu, ne constitue pas un trouble manifestement illicite dans la mesure où les deux contrats constituent un tout indivisible.

Cass. com., 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-20.336

Cass. com., 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-11.223

Cass. soc., 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-41.866

Cass. com., 18 septembre 2007, n° 05-21.395

Cass. com., 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-16.070

Cass. com., 18 septembre 2007, n° 06-12.082

EC, September 17, 2007, No M.4772

L'indemnité de rupture prévue par l'article L. 134-12 du Code de commerce, qui ne vise pas les agents immobiliers, peut cependant s'appliquer à ces derniers lorsque le contrat conclu avec l'agence y renvoit. 

CA Bordeaux, 2e ch., 17 septembre 2007, n° 06-05121

The Commission does not have unlimited discretion when formulating remedies for the purpose of putting an end to the infringement and must comply with the principle of proportionality.

The Commission exceeds its powers of investigation and enforcement when it requires, as a remedy, that an undertaking investigated for abuse of a dominant position establishes an independent monitoring trustee with a permanent and unlimited right of access to its information, documents, premises and employees as well as to the source code of its relevant products, and decides that the undertaking in question would bear the costs pertaining to the appointment of that monitoring trustee.

The fact that the abusive behavior in question, namely a software editor's refusal to supply information on the interoperability of its systems and a tied sales operation, is part of a leveraging effect strategy that consists in the use of a dominant position on one market in order to extend it to two other neighboring markets, constitutes a means of identifying a very serious infringement.

The refusal by a software vendor in a dominant position to disclose information to competitors meant to facilitate the interoperability of its products is abusive.

The identification of tied sales contrary to Article 102 TFEU implies, with regard to two separate products, the possession of a dominant position on the market of the binder product, the impossibility of choosing the binder product without the associated product, the restriction of competition and the absence of objective justification of such behavior. 

Tied sales of a given product and a dominant product do not necessarily have an exclusionary effect on the competitors acting on that market, the identification of that effect involving the investigation of the actual effects of the transaction on the market of the associated product.

To fall within the scope of Article 102 TFEU, a tied sale presupposes the existence of distinct, even complementary products and of an independent demand for the allegedly tied product.

The argument that an undertaking in a dominant position has less incentive to develop a given technology if it is required to make that technology available to its competitors, can be reviewed only as possible justification of its conduct.  

The refusal by a software vendor in a dominant position to disclose information to competitors meant to facilitate the interoperability of its products - where the disclosure of such information is customary in the sector concerned - is not objectively justified insofar as competitors would not be able to reproduce or clone its products or certain of their features.

The refusal, by an undertaking in a dominant position, to grant a licence concerning intellectual property rights, may constitute an abuse even if it does not prevent the appearance of a new product, if consumer harm comes about due to market, production and technical development limitations.

The condition according to which competition must be eliminated, which makes it possible to classify an undertaking's refusal to grant a licence to a third party as an abuse, is fulfilled even if the competitors retain a marginal presence in certain niches.

CFI, gr. chamber, September 17, 2007, No T-201/04

Only documents drawn up exclusively for the purpose of seeking advice from an independent lawyer, as opposed to an in-house lawyer, are covered by the protection of confidentiality of communications between lawyers and their clients.

The confidentiality of communications between lawyers and their clients has been breached where the Commission has seised the documents subject to a claim for protection under the legal professional privilege and examined their content without having taken a formal rejection decision of the claim, which would have made this decision open to challenge by action for annulment.

The confidentiality of communications between lawyers and their clients has been breached when the undertaking under investigation is forced to accept a cursory look at the documents by Commission officials even though the applicants claimed, and provided supporting justification, that such an examination might lead to the disclosure of confidential information.

A decision rejecting a claim of legal privilege for a confidential document or the seizure of such document during an investigation, without placing it in a sealed envelope or taking a formal rejection decision, is open to an action for annulment insofar as it is definitive in nature and independent of any final decision making a finding of an infringement.

CFI, 1st chamber, extended composition, September 17, 2007, No T-125/03

Les décisions de rejet d'une demande de protection d'un document au titre de la confidentialité ou de saisie d'un tel document lors d'une vérification sans le placer dans une enveloppe scellée ni prendre de décision formelle de rejet, sont susceptibles d'un recours en annulation dans la mesure où elles revêtent un caractère définitif et indépendant de l'éventuelle décision finale constatant l'infraction.

La confidentialité de la correspondance entre un avocat et son client n'est pas respectée lorsque l'entreprise qui fait l'objet d'une vérification est contrainte d'accepter un examen sommaire des documents par les agents de la Commission alors qu'elle a démontré l'existence d'un risque de divulgation d'informations confidentielles.

La confidentialité de la correspondance entre un avocat et son client n'est pas respectée lorsque les agents de la Commission prennent connaissance du contenu de documents faisant l'objet d'une demande de protection sans adopter de décision formelle de rejet de cette demande qui permettrait à l'entreprise concernée de contester la décision de rejet devant le tribunal.

Seuls les documents élaborés exclusivement en vue d'une demande d'avis juridique à un avocat indépendant, et non un juriste d'entreprise, bénéficient du privilège de confidentialité des communications entre avocats et clients.

Court decisions rendered in 2007 - Page 24