Post by account_disabled on Dec 31, 2023 23:32:57 GMT -5
Ain the range is unenforceable ELITE imposed by the selective distribution agreement and to oblige accordingly Samsung to continue to deliver to it the products corresponding to this agreement. In addition on the same day Concurrence sued Amazon for the first time to force it to withdraw from its websites Amazon.fr Amazon.de Amazon.co.uk Amazon.es and Amazon.it all Samsung product offers for a certain number of models. By the contradictory order of February the judge delegated to take provisional measures within the tribunal de commerce de Paris Commercial Court of Paris declared himself incompetent with regard to Amazon sites operating outside.
French territory stated that no interim relief was necessary Country Email List with respect to Concurrences claims against Samsung and dismissed Concurrences claims against Amazon. On June Concurrence appealed against this decision to the cour dappel de Paris Paris Court of Appeal. By the decision of of Appeal of Paris partly reformed the order issued by the judge delegated to take provisional measures within the tribunal de commerce de Paris Commercial Court of Paris declaring the requests inadmissible by Concurrence against Samsung and dismissing Concurrences claims against Amazon. By the same decision the cour dappel de Paris.
Court of Appeal of Paris confirmed this order maintaining of the French Republic to judge the action related to Amazon sites operating outside the territory of this member state. In the appeal Concurrence claims that the contested judgment would have erroneously established the lack of jurisdiction of the French court with regard to Amazons websites operating outside French territory since they were not aimed at the French public. However even supposing that the criterion of website accessibility is not sufficient the cour dappel de Paris Court of Appeal of Paris would have unlawfully refrained from investigating whether the sales system on Amazons websites allowed the shipment of the products proposed for sale.
French territory stated that no interim relief was necessary Country Email List with respect to Concurrences claims against Samsung and dismissed Concurrences claims against Amazon. On June Concurrence appealed against this decision to the cour dappel de Paris Paris Court of Appeal. By the decision of of Appeal of Paris partly reformed the order issued by the judge delegated to take provisional measures within the tribunal de commerce de Paris Commercial Court of Paris declaring the requests inadmissible by Concurrence against Samsung and dismissing Concurrences claims against Amazon. By the same decision the cour dappel de Paris.
Court of Appeal of Paris confirmed this order maintaining of the French Republic to judge the action related to Amazon sites operating outside the territory of this member state. In the appeal Concurrence claims that the contested judgment would have erroneously established the lack of jurisdiction of the French court with regard to Amazons websites operating outside French territory since they were not aimed at the French public. However even supposing that the criterion of website accessibility is not sufficient the cour dappel de Paris Court of Appeal of Paris would have unlawfully refrained from investigating whether the sales system on Amazons websites allowed the shipment of the products proposed for sale.