Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe

Advocate General Jan Mazák has advised the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) that a cosmetic manufacturer's refusal to allow distributors to sell its products online violates EU competition law. Pierre Fabre Dermo-Cosmétique manufactures various ranges of cosmetic and personal care products which are sold through a selective distribution network. As part of its distribution arrangements, it required all sales be made in a physical space with a qualified pharmacist present, effectively precluding any online sales. The French competition authority found the prohibition of online sales to be anti-competitive. Pierre Fabre disagreed and the issue has been referred by the Paris Court of Appeal to the highest court in the EU for advice. EU law prohibits agreements which have, as their object or effect, the restriction of competition. The Advocate General considered that the risks to competition from the restrictions reside in the fact that they eliminate a modern means of distribution, limit sales to catchment areas around the physical establishments, and reduce the price transparency normally facilitated by internet sales. His views are consistent with the approach of the European Commission to internet sales which has been set out in detail in its recently revised guidelines on vertical restraints. In that context, the European Commission has stated that as a matter of principle all resellers should be allowed to make internet sales. (US law likely would come to a different conclusion as vertical agreements or agreements between a manufacturer and its distributors regarding resale are reviewed under a rule of reason and courts look to the effect on overall competition not simply the effect on sales of a particular brand.) Pierre Fabre had argued that the ban was justified on public health grounds because correct use of its products required the advice of a pharmacist. However, the Advocate General noted that the products were not medicinal and there were no regulatory requirements mandating such conditions. Information and instructions accompanying the products could be a suitable alternative. He, additionally, considered that such bans in the context of selective distribution networks were excessive and not proportional vis a vis their purported aims. Although the CJEU has in the past accepted arguments that selective distribution agreements can be justified to preserve the image of luxury products, the Advocate General concluded that absolute bans of online sales would only be proportional in exceptional circumstances, as product image can be protected via appropriate, reasonable and non-discriminatory conditions on internet sales The Advocate General's opinion is not binding and the Court's decision is pending. If the CJEU does follow the opinion this will confirm the European Commission's approach in its guidelines on this issue and be a deliver a clear message to manufacturers that they cannot prevent internet sales. – Sue Hinchliffe

Read more detail on Recent Advertising Law Posts –

Legal notice about the Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.

Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe?

This entry was posted in Advertising Law and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe

Advocate General Jan Mazák has advised the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) that a cosmetic manufacturer's refusal to allow distributors to sell its products online violates EU competition law. Pierre Fabre Dermo-Cosmétique manufactures various ranges of cosmetic and personal care products which are sold through a selective distribution network. As part of its distribution arrangements, it required all sales be made in a physical space with a qualified pharmacist present, effectively precluding any online sales. The French competition authority found the prohibition of online sales to be anti-competitive. Pierre Fabre disagreed and the issue has been referred by the Paris Court of Appeal to the highest court in the EU for advice. EU law prohibits agreements which have, as their object or effect, the restriction of competition. The Advocate General considered that the risks to competition from the restrictions reside in the fact that they eliminate a modern means of distribution, limit sales to catchment areas around the physical establishments, and reduce the price transparency normally facilitated by internet sales. His views are consistent with the approach of the European Commission to internet sales which has been set out in detail in its recently revised guidelines on vertical restraints. In that context, the European Commission has stated that as a matter of principle all resellers should be allowed to make internet sales. (US law likely would come to a different conclusion as vertical agreements or agreements between a manufacturer and its distributors regarding resale are reviewed under a rule of reason and courts look to the effect on overall competition not simply the effect on sales of a particular brand.) Pierre Fabre had argued that the ban was justified on public health grounds because correct use of its products required the advice of a pharmacist. However, the Advocate General noted that the products were not medicinal and there were no regulatory requirements mandating such conditions. Information and instructions accompanying the products could be a suitable alternative. He, additionally, considered that such bans in the context of selective distribution networks were excessive and not proportional vis a vis their purported aims. Although the CJEU has in the past accepted arguments that selective distribution agreements can be justified to preserve the image of luxury products, the Advocate General concluded that absolute bans of online sales would only be proportional in exceptional circumstances, as product image can be protected via appropriate, reasonable and non-discriminatory conditions on internet sales The Advocate General's opinion is not binding and the Court's decision is pending. If the CJEU does follow the opinion this will confirm the European Commission's approach in its guidelines on this issue and be a deliver a clear message to manufacturers that they cannot prevent internet sales. – Sue Hinchliffe

Read more detail on Recent Advertising Law Posts –

Legal notice about the Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.

Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe?

This entry was posted in Advertising Law and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe

Advocate General Jan Mazák has advised the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) that a cosmetic manufacturer's refusal to allow distributors to sell its products online violates EU competition law. Pierre Fabre Dermo-Cosmétique manufactures various ranges of cosmetic and personal care products which are sold through a selective distribution network. As part of its distribution arrangements, it required all sales be made in a physical space with a qualified pharmacist present, effectively precluding any online sales. The French competition authority found the prohibition of online sales to be anti-competitive. Pierre Fabre disagreed and the issue has been referred by the Paris Court of Appeal to the highest court in the EU for advice. EU law prohibits agreements which have, as their object or effect, the restriction of competition. The Advocate General considered that the risks to competition from the restrictions reside in the fact that they eliminate a modern means of distribution, limit sales to catchment areas around the physical establishments, and reduce the price transparency normally facilitated by internet sales. His views are consistent with the approach of the European Commission to internet sales which has been set out in detail in its recently revised guidelines on vertical restraints. In that context, the European Commission has stated that as a matter of principle all resellers should be allowed to make internet sales. (US law likely would come to a different conclusion as vertical agreements or agreements between a manufacturer and its distributors regarding resale are reviewed under a rule of reason and courts look to the effect on overall competition not simply the effect on sales of a particular brand.) Pierre Fabre had argued that the ban was justified on public health grounds because correct use of its products required the advice of a pharmacist. However, the Advocate General noted that the products were not medicinal and there were no regulatory requirements mandating such conditions. Information and instructions accompanying the products could be a suitable alternative. He, additionally, considered that such bans in the context of selective distribution networks were excessive and not proportional vis a vis their purported aims. Although the CJEU has in the past accepted arguments that selective distribution agreements can be justified to preserve the image of luxury products, the Advocate General concluded that absolute bans of online sales would only be proportional in exceptional circumstances, as product image can be protected via appropriate, reasonable and non-discriminatory conditions on internet sales The Advocate General's opinion is not binding and the Court's decision is pending. If the CJEU does follow the opinion this will confirm the European Commission's approach in its guidelines on this issue and be a deliver a clear message to manufacturers that they cannot prevent internet sales. – Sue Hinchliffe

Read more detail on Recent Advertising Law Posts –

Legal notice about the Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.

Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe?

This entry was posted in Advertising Law and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe

Advocate General Jan Mazák has advised the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) that a cosmetic manufacturer's refusal to allow distributors to sell its products online violates EU competition law. Pierre Fabre Dermo-Cosmétique manufactures various ranges of cosmetic and personal care products which are sold through a selective distribution network. As part of its distribution arrangements, it required all sales be made in a physical space with a qualified pharmacist present, effectively precluding any online sales. The French competition authority found the prohibition of online sales to be anti-competitive. Pierre Fabre disagreed and the issue has been referred by the Paris Court of Appeal to the highest court in the EU for advice. EU law prohibits agreements which have, as their object or effect, the restriction of competition. The Advocate General considered that the risks to competition from the restrictions reside in the fact that they eliminate a modern means of distribution, limit sales to catchment areas around the physical establishments, and reduce the price transparency normally facilitated by internet sales. His views are consistent with the approach of the European Commission to internet sales which has been set out in detail in its recently revised guidelines on vertical restraints. In that context, the European Commission has stated that as a matter of principle all resellers should be allowed to make internet sales. (US law likely would come to a different conclusion as vertical agreements or agreements between a manufacturer and its distributors regarding resale are reviewed under a rule of reason and courts look to the effect on overall competition not simply the effect on sales of a particular brand.) Pierre Fabre had argued that the ban was justified on public health grounds because correct use of its products required the advice of a pharmacist. However, the Advocate General noted that the products were not medicinal and there were no regulatory requirements mandating such conditions. Information and instructions accompanying the products could be a suitable alternative. He, additionally, considered that such bans in the context of selective distribution networks were excessive and not proportional vis a vis their purported aims. Although the CJEU has in the past accepted arguments that selective distribution agreements can be justified to preserve the image of luxury products, the Advocate General concluded that absolute bans of online sales would only be proportional in exceptional circumstances, as product image can be protected via appropriate, reasonable and non-discriminatory conditions on internet sales The Advocate General's opinion is not binding and the Court's decision is pending. If the CJEU does follow the opinion this will confirm the European Commission's approach in its guidelines on this issue and be a deliver a clear message to manufacturers that they cannot prevent internet sales. – Sue Hinchliffe

Read more detail on Recent Advertising Law Posts –

Legal notice about the Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.

Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe?

This entry was posted in Advertising Law and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe

Advocate General Jan Mazák has advised the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) that a cosmetic manufacturer's refusal to allow distributors to sell its products online violates EU competition law. Pierre Fabre Dermo-Cosmétique manufactures various ranges of cosmetic and personal care products which are sold through a selective distribution network. As part of its distribution arrangements, it required all sales be made in a physical space with a qualified pharmacist present, effectively precluding any online sales. The French competition authority found the prohibition of online sales to be anti-competitive. Pierre Fabre disagreed and the issue has been referred by the Paris Court of Appeal to the highest court in the EU for advice. EU law prohibits agreements which have, as their object or effect, the restriction of competition. The Advocate General considered that the risks to competition from the restrictions reside in the fact that they eliminate a modern means of distribution, limit sales to catchment areas around the physical establishments, and reduce the price transparency normally facilitated by internet sales. His views are consistent with the approach of the European Commission to internet sales which has been set out in detail in its recently revised guidelines on vertical restraints. In that context, the European Commission has stated that as a matter of principle all resellers should be allowed to make internet sales. (US law likely would come to a different conclusion as vertical agreements or agreements between a manufacturer and its distributors regarding resale are reviewed under a rule of reason and courts look to the effect on overall competition not simply the effect on sales of a particular brand.) Pierre Fabre had argued that the ban was justified on public health grounds because correct use of its products required the advice of a pharmacist. However, the Advocate General noted that the products were not medicinal and there were no regulatory requirements mandating such conditions. Information and instructions accompanying the products could be a suitable alternative. He, additionally, considered that such bans in the context of selective distribution networks were excessive and not proportional vis a vis their purported aims. Although the CJEU has in the past accepted arguments that selective distribution agreements can be justified to preserve the image of luxury products, the Advocate General concluded that absolute bans of online sales would only be proportional in exceptional circumstances, as product image can be protected via appropriate, reasonable and non-discriminatory conditions on internet sales The Advocate General's opinion is not binding and the Court's decision is pending. If the CJEU does follow the opinion this will confirm the European Commission's approach in its guidelines on this issue and be a deliver a clear message to manufacturers that they cannot prevent internet sales. – Sue Hinchliffe

Read more detail on Recent Advertising Law Posts –

Legal notice about the Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.

Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to Manufacturers Face Limits on Ability to Control Online Sales of Products in Europe?

This entry was posted in Advertising Law and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply