Unfair trading practices in agri-food: France – Legalmondo

France regulates unfair trading practices in the agri-food supply chain more strictly than Directive (EU) 2019/633 requires. Ordinance No. 2021-859 of 30 June 2021 transposed the Directive into a framework already built by the Egalim laws, and France chose not to apply the turnover thresholds set out in the Directive: the rules therefore cover all commercial relationships involving the sale of agricultural and food products, whatever the size or nationality of the parties. Written annual agreements signed before 1 March, automatic price revision clauses, capped payment terms and administrative fines reaching €2 million, doubled for repeat infringements, are the core of the regime, enforced by the DGCCRF.

Summary

1. Which French law implements Directive (EU) 2019/633, and since when
2. Products covered by the French rules
3. Scope of the French rules compared with the Directive
4. Suppliers and buyers covered, regardless of size and nationality
5. Applicable law and jurisdiction in international supply contracts
6. Where French law goes further than the Directive
7. Mandatory content of an agri-food supply agreement
8. Penalties for breaching the contractual requirements
9. Unfair practices prohibited beyond the Directive
10. Penalties for unfair commercial practices
11. The DGCCRF and its enforcement powers
12. Findings of the latest DGCCRF report

Which French law implements Directive (EU) 2019/633, and since when?

Directive (EU) 2019/633 was transposed into French law by Ordinance No. 2021-859 of 2021, June 30th, whose provisions entered into force on July 1, 2021 and apply to contracts concluded as from November 1, 2021. Contracts concluded before that date were granted a 12-month period, starting on July 1, 2021, to comply with these provisions.

This transposition forms part of an already well-established legislative framework shaped by « Egalim I » Law No. 2018-938 of October 30, 2018; « Egalim II » Law No. 2021-1357 of October 18, 2021 and « Egalim III » Law No. 2023-1041 of November 17, 2023, which strengthen contractual relations and the protection of agricultural producers. Even prior to the transposition of the Directive, French law had already refocused the rules on restrictive business practices around the following unlawful practices:

• A significant imbalance in the rights and obligations of the parties;
• the granting of an advantage without consideration; and
• The sudden termination of established business relationships.

The Ordinance of June 30, 2021 transposed those provisions of Directive (EU) 2019/633 that did not fall within this existing framework, specifically introducing three new restrictive practices applicable to agricultural and food products into the French Commercial Code  (Com.C):

• The cancellation of an order for perishable products at short notice (Article L. 443-5 of the Com.C);
• The unlawful obtaining, use, or disclosure of the supplier’s trade secrets (Article L. 443-6 of the Com.C);
• The refusal to confirm in writing the terms of a supply agreement where the supplier has requested such confirmation (Article L. 443-7 of the Com.C).

This framework has been strengthened by Law No. 2026-796 of 18 August 2026 on emergency measures for agricultural protection and sovereignty (the “2026 Agricultural Sovereignty Law”), most of whose relevant provisions entered into force on 20 August 2026. The 2026 law notably amends agricultural contracting rules, food-sector price revision mechanisms and certain restrictive trade practices.

Which agri-food products are covered by the French rules?

Directive 2019/633 applies to the sale of “agricultural and food products”, defined in Article 2 as “the products listed in Annex I to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as well as products not listed in that Annex but processed for use as food for human consumption by using products listed in that Annex”, subject to the annual turnover thresholds of suppliers and buyers set out in Article 1§2.

Is the scope of the French rules broader than the Directive?

In France, the scope of the provisions transposing the Directive is the same as that of EU law, as they apply to agricultural and food products.

However, certain French provisions in this area have a broader scope of application. Many provisions of Title IV of Book IV of the French Commercial Code apply to commercial relationships relating to “production, distribution or service activities” (in particular restrictive practices – Article L. 442-1 Com.C). Some of these provisions apply to fast-moving consumer goods, defined in Article L. 441-4 of the French Commercial Code as “non-durable products with a high frequency and recurrence of consumption”, the list of which is set by decree, as well as to food products.

Which suppliers and buyers are covered, and does their size matter?

France chose not to introduce the supplier and buyer turnover thresholds provided for in Directive 2019/633. As a result, the national provisions apply to all commercial relationships involving the sale of agricultural and food products, irrespective of the nationality or economic size of the suppliers and buyers.

Which law applies to an international agri-food supply contract?

French law does not provide for specific conflict-of-law rules applicable to supply contracts in the agri-food sector. At first glance, international contracts for the supply of agri-food products are therefore governed by the general conflict-of-law rules applicable in France.

Choice of law under Rome I and the 1955 Hague Convention

These general rules are laid down by Regulation (EC) No. 593/2008 of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations, known as the Rome I Regulation. Rome I establishes as a general principle that the parties are free to choose the law applicable to an international contract, either expressly or implicitly. In the absence of an express choice, the applicable law depends on the legal characterization of the supply contract.

A distinction must therefore be made depending on the nature of the supply contract. If the French court characterizes the contract as a contract for the sale of goods, it may apply either the Rome I Regulation or, more likely, the Hague Convention of 15 June 1955 on the law applicable to international sales of tangible movable goods. In both cases, the applicable law would be the law of the State in which the seller is established. If the supply contract is characterized as a processing or bespoke supply contract, particularly where it is based on detailed specifications, the French court would apply the Rome I Regulation and may consider such a contract to constitute a service contract rather than a sale contract. In that case, the applicable law would be the law of the State in which the service provider is established.

Article L. 444-1.A and the limits of overriding mandatory rules

In addition, it its worthwhile looking at Article L. 444-1.A of the French Commercial Code which states

“The provisions of Chapters I, II and III of this Title apply to any agreement between a supplier and a buyer relating to products or services marketed on French territory. These provisions are matters of public policy. Any dispute relating to their application falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the French courts, subject to compliance with European Union law and international treaties ratified or approved by France and without prejudice to recourse to arbitration.”

At first glance, this provision pretends to bring all commercial contracts within the scope of French law where the products or services are marketed in France, like an overriding mandatory rule (OMR). However, this approach appears ambiguous, unjustified and at the end ineffective.

First, restrictive trade practices (RTP) do not constitute OMR within the meaning of the Rome I Regulation. Article L. 444-1.A does not expressly refer to the terms overriding mandatory rules and just merely recalls the domestic public policy nature of the relevant provisions.

Second, French case law has repeatedly refused to qualify RTP as OMR, with the exception of enforcement actions brought by the French Ministry of Economy and Finance against third party imposing to their counterpart blatant imbalance clauses.

Third, the general characterization of the provisions of Title IV of the French Commercial Code as OMR does not satisfy the test of sufficient connection and imperative necessity as defined by the ECJ in its ruling of 5 September 2024 (Huk-Coburg-Allgemeine Versicherung, Case C-86/23).

Exclusive jurisdiction of the French courts and its exceptions

With respect to jurisdiction, Article L. 444-1.A wants to create an exclusive jurisdiction of French courts for commercial matters such as RTP. However, it provides clear and wide exceptions based on compliance with European Union law, with international conventions on jurisdiction matters and with arbitration rules.

In practice, any jurisdiction clause (subject to the exception here after) or arbitration clause stipulated in an international contract must be upheld by French courts, which must therefore decline jurisdiction. Only in very limited circumstances may French courts assert this exclusive jurisdiction rule, notably where the counterparty is established in a State that has not entered into any relevant multilateral or bilateral convention with France (such as Lugano Convention, The Hague conventions…).

Are the French rules stricter than Directive (EU) 2019/633?

French commercial law is stricter than the rules laid down by Directive 2019/633, for several reasons:

• A broader scope of application:
• No thresholds limit the application of these provisions; as a result, all economic operators are covered, regardless of their size or turnover;
• While certain provisions are specific to food products, there is also a common framework applicable to all products without distinction, as well as a specific regulatory regime for fast-moving consumer goods (see Question 3).
• Prior to the transposition of the Directive, France already had a legislative framework in place in this area (the Egalim laws), which it continued to develop after the entry into force of the ordinance transposing the European Directive; this is why the ordinance transposed only four new restrictive trade practices, rather than the entire list set out in the Directive.
• French law provides for strict regulation governing commercial negotiations, particularly in the large-scale retail sector. The 2026 Agricultural Sovereignty Law further strengthens this framework by introducing tighter rules on agricultural contract negotiations, reference production-cost indicators, automatic price revision mechanisms in the food sector, repeated tendering procedures and substantial reductions in order volumes during negotiations.

What must a valid agri-food supply agreement contain in France?

Chapter I of Title IV of Book IV of the French Commercial Code, entitled “Transparency in commercial relationships”, imposes numerous requirements governing the negotiation and performance of commercial agreements:

The seller’s terms and conditions of sale

The seller’s pricing policy: the seller must provide any buyer who so requests with its terms and conditions of sale, which must include, at a minimum, the conditions of sale, payment terms, the price list, and the schedule of price reductions (discounts, immediate rebates, deferred rebates, and “free” products) (Article L. 441-1 of the Com.C).

These terms and conditions may be general (applicable to all customers), category-based (applicable to a category of customers, such as wholesalers, provided that the classification is based on objective identification criteria), or specific and individually negotiated (supplementing or derogating from the general or category-based terms and conditions of sale).

In this respect, specific provisions apply to food products and products intended for pet food (Article L. 441-1-1 of the French Commercial Code), as well as to wholesalers (Article L. 441-1-2 of the French Commercial Code).

Since 20 August 2026, Article L. 441-1-1 IV bis Com.C. also allows the supplier’s terms and conditions of sale for food products and pet food to include an automatic formula revising the unit-price list in line with upward or downward changes in the cost of agricultural raw materials used in the product.

The buyer’s commercial cooperation services

La politique de coopération commerciale de l’acheteur: L’acheteur, quant à lui, propose et négocie avec le fournisseur des services rendus par lui et qui bénéficient, directement ou indirectement, au fournisseur (Art. L. 441-3 C.com.):

• Commercial cooperation services: these are services provided in connection with the resale of products or services to consumers, or with a view to their resale to professionals, which are intended to promote the marketing of the supplier’s products and are separable from the act of sale.
• Other services: “other obligations intended to promote the commercial relationship between the supplier and the distributor or service provider” (L. 441-3, III. 3° Com. C).
• Promotional benefits: Direct allocation of discounts («remise») to consumers by the distributor acting under a mandate from the supplier for fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG).

The written annual agreement and the 31 January or 1 March deadlines

Formalisation of the negotiation: a written agreement must be entered into, before 1 March of each year, between the supplier and the distributor or service provider, in the form of either a single document or an annual framework agreement supplemented by specific implementation agreements.

As an experimental rule until 31 December 2029, where the supplier is a legal entity with worldwide annual turnover (excluding tax) below €350 million in the last closed financial year, the statutory 1^st of March date referred to in Articles L. 441-3, L. 441-4, L. 441-6 and L. 443-8 Com. C. is replaced by 31th of January. In the same situations, the three-month periods referred to in Article L. 441-4 VI and Article L. 443-8 V(B) Com. C. are reduced to two months.

Law No. 2026-796 introduces also two experiments: Until 15 April 2029 for agreements governed by Article L. 443-8 Com. C., and until 15 April 2028 for agreements governed by Article L. 441-4 Com. C., where the annual agreement has not been concluded by 1^st of March (or within two months from the beginning of a special marketing cycle), the supplier may, if no new contract has been formed, terminate the commercial relationship without the distributor being able to rely on the rules on sudden termination under Article L. 442-1 II Com.C., or request application of a notice period compliant with that provision.

Negotiation timetable for producer/first-buyer of agro-food contracts: under Article L. 631-24II bis of the French Rural and Maritime Fishing code (“CRPM”), the written contract or framework agreement must be concluded within four months after the prospective buyer receives the producer’s written proposal (this period may be extended by an extended interprofessional agreement, up to six months). If no agreement is reached, one of the parties must refer the matter to the Agricultural Commercial Relations Mediator within 15 days. If mediation fails and both parties still intend to establish or continue the relationship, the Agricultural Commercial Disputes Settlement Committee must be seized within a further 15 days; where applicable, the contract must then be concluded within two months after the parties receive the Committee’s decision

It must set out (Art. L. 441-3 Com.C.):

• The terms and conditions of the sale of products or the provision of services (including price reductions) and, where applicable, the types of situations in which and the modalities according to which general sales conditions (GSCs) may apply.
• Commercial cooperation services
• Other obligations
• Any service or obligation arising from an agreement entered into with a legal entity located outside French territory with which the distributor is directly or indirectly affiliated

It being specified that the mandatory contents of the written agreement vary depending on its scope of application, namely whether the agreement is entered into with wholesalers, relates to fast-moving consumer goods, or concerns agricultural products (Art. L. 441-7 and L. 441-8 Com.C).

Stricter rules for agricultural products: duration, price revision, renegotiation

More specifically, with respect to agricultural products, French law is all the more protective as regards the formalisation of negotiations and provides for even stricter obligations:

• Clause relating to the duration of the contract: under Article L. 631-24 VI CRPM, the minimum duration of a contract between a producer and a first buyer is three years, except for products subject to excise duties and for grapes, must and the wines produced from them. Unless otherwise agreed, contracts are renewable by tacit renewal for an equivalent period; where the buyer gives notice of non-renewal, the notice period may not be less than three months. The producer may expressly waive the statutory minimum durations in writing, in accordance with Articles 148 and 168 of Regulation (EU) No. 1308/2013. A contract or framework agreement lasting less than three years may omit an automatic upward/downward revision clause for a fixed price.
• Clauses relating to price determination mechanismsi and revision: Article L. 631-24 III CRPM requires the contract or framework agreement to contain the price and its automatic upward/downward revision mechanism, or the criteria and methods used to determine the price, including the weighting of the relevant indicators. The producer’s proposal must take account of one or more indicators relating to relevant agricultural production costs and their evolution. The parties must refer in the final contract or framework agreement to the reference indicators published by the competent interprofessional organisation (or, failing publication, by the relevant agricultural technical institutes), unless they expressly choose other agricultural production-cost indicators and state the reasons for that choice. Clauses whose purpose or effect is automatically to renegotiate or change the price so as to align it with a more favourable price practised by a competing buyer, producer, producer organisation or association of producer organisations are deemed unwritten.

For food products and pet food subject to Article L. 443-8 Com.C., the annual written agreement must contain an automatic formula revising the unit-price list according to upward and downward changes in the cost of agricultural raw materials. If the supplier’s terms and conditions contain the formula permitted by Article L. 441-1-1 IV bis Com.C., the annual agreement must reproduce that formula and it is not negotiable. Price changes resulting from its application must be implemented no later than one month after activation. A distributor may object only where objective economic data show that the link drawn by the supplier between raw-material cost changes and the impact on its price list is manifestly erroneous.

Lastly, specific provisions apply to contracts entered into between a supplier and a distributor “relating to the design and production of food products in accordance with specifications meeting the buyer’s specific needs and marketed under a private label”, as set out in Article L. 441-7 of the French Commercial Code.

Invoicing and payment terms for food products and beverages

Invoicing and payment terms: any purchase and sale transaction must give rise to an invoice, issued upon completion of the transaction and containing a number of mandatory particulars. In addition, the Commercial Code provides for a default payment period of 30 days, with a maximum payment period of 60 days or 45 days end of month, and sets out late payment penalties and a fixed recovery fee in the event of late payment (Art. L. 441-9 and L. 441-10 Com.C)

In addition, the legislator has introduced specific payment deadlines for food products and beverages (Art. L. 441-11 Com.C):

• Perishable agricultural products, perishable food products, frozen or deep-frozen meat, frozen fish and prepared meals: 30 days from delivery. In the case of periodic billing:30 days after the end of the ten-day period;
• For seasonal fruits and vegetables: 30 days from the end of the month of delivery;
• Live cattle and fresh meat intended for consumption: 20 days from the date of delivery;
• Alcoholic beverages subject to excise duty (e.g., Armagnac, Cognac, brandy, gin, rum, vodka): 30 days from the end of the month of delivery. For wine and other non-sparkling fermented beverages covered by Article L. 665-3 CRPM, the first buyer must, in principle, pay the seller (or its subrogee) an advance of at least 15% of the order amount within ten clear days after conclusion of the sale contract. Since 20 August 2026, interprofessional bodies may provide a derogation from this advance-payment obligation only in the context of multiannual contracts.
• Non-perishable agricultural and food products: If the invoice is issued by the supplier: 60 days from the date of issue of the invoice; and If the invoice is issued by the buyer: 60 days from the date of preparation of the invoice.

Logistics penalties

Logistics penalites: lastly, the French Commercial Code strictly regulates specific contractual sanctions known as “logistics penalties”, relating to the supplier’s failure to comply with its delivery, conformity, or timing obligations (Art. L. 441-17 Com.C).

What are the penalties for breaching the contractual requirements?

In the event of a breach of contractual requirements, several sanctions may apply:

• Seller’s pricing policy: an administrative fine not exceeding €15,000 for a natural person and €75,000 for a legal entity ( L. 441-1 Com.C).

For food products and products intended for pet food, the administrative fine may not exceed €75,000 for a natural person and €375,000 for a legal entity, and the maximum fine is doubled in the event of a repeated infringement within two years from the date on which the first sanction decision became final (Art. L. 443-8 Com.C). The new information requirements attached to an optional automatic price-revision formula in the supplier’s terms and conditions (Article L. 441-1-1 IV bis Com.C.) are also backed by the administrative sanction provided in Article L. 443-8 Com.C. More generally, any breach of Article L. 443-8 I to VI is punishable by an administrative fine of up to €75,000 for a natural person and €375,000 for a legal entity, with the maximum doubled for a repeated infringement within two years.

• Buyer’s commercial cooperation policy and formalisation of negotiations: an administrative fine not exceeding €75,000 for a natural person and €375,000 for a legal entity. The maximum fine is increased to €150,000 for a natural person and €750,000 for a legal entity in the event of a repeated infringement within two years from the date on which the first sanction decision became final (Art. L. 441-6 Com.C).

Failure to comply with the March 1st deadline provided for in Article L. 441-3(IV) is punishable by an administrative fine not exceeding €200,000 for a natural person and €1,000,000 for a legal entity. In the event of a repeated infringement within two years from the date on which the first sanction decision became final, the maximum fine is increased to €400,000 for a natural person and €2,000,000 for a legal entity. For suppliers falling within the temporary €350 million turnover experiment introduced by the 2026 Agricultural Sovereignty Law, references to the 1 March deadline must be read as 31 January for the duration of the experiment (until 31 December 2029).

• Absence of a price revision clause in the agricultural sector: an administrative fine not exceeding €75,000 for a natural person and €375,000 for a legal entity, with the maximum fine increased to €150,000 for a natural person and €750,000 for a legal entity in the event of a repeated infringement within two years from the date on which the first sanction decision became final (Art. L. 441-7 C)
• Absence of a renegotiation clause: an administrative fine not exceeding €75,000 for a natural person and €375,000 for a legal entity. The maximum fine is doubled in the event of a repeated infringement within two years from the date on which the first sanction decision became final (Art. L. 441-8 Com.C)).
• Failure to comply with payment deadlines, absence of mandatory information required under the terms of payment, setting of non-compliant rates or conditions for late payment penalties, and failure to comply with the terms of calculation of payment deadlines agreed between the parties: administrative fine not exceeding €75,000 for a natural person and €2 million for a legal entity, with the maximum fine increased to €150,000 for a natural person and €4 million for a legal entity in the event of a repeat offense within two years of the date on which the first penalty decision became final ( L. 441-16 Com.C).

Which unfair practices does French law prohibit beyond the Directive?

In addition to the contractual obligations described above, aimed at preventing abuses and unfair commercial practices between businesses, Articles L. 442-1 to L. 442-12 of the French Commercial Code set out a list of «unfair commercial practices between undertakings» (« pratiques commerciales déloyales entre entreprises »), including:

• Obtaining or attempting to obtain from the other party an advantage without consideration or manifestly disproportionate to the consideration provided (Art. L. 442-1(I) Com.C);
• Subjecting or attempting to subject the other party to obligations creating a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations ( L. 442-1, I Com.C.);
• Subjecting a commercial partner to repeated competitive tendering procedures or calls for tenders whose frequency or operating conditions are liable to create a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations ( L. 442-1, I, 6° Com.C.);
• imposing logistics penalties in breach of Article 441-17 (Art. L. 442-1, I Com.C.);
• Applying or obtaining discriminatory prices, payment terms, or sales or purchase conditions not justified by real consideration set out in the annual agreement, creating a competitive advantage or disadvantage ( L. 442-1, I Com.C.);
• Failure to conduct commercial negotiations in good faith in accordance with Article L. 441-4, leading to the failure to conclude a contract within the deadline set out in Article L. 441-3 ( L. 442-1, I Com.C.);
• Abruptly terminating, even partially, an established commercial relationship without sufficient written notice, taking into account the duration of the relationship and industry practices or interprofessional agreements ( L. 442-1, II Com.C.);
• Implementing, during contract negotiations, a substantial reduction in the volume of orders placed with an established commercial partner, even temporarily, where the scale, unusual nature or circumstances of the reduction are such as to jeopardise the balance of the established commercial relationship ( L. 442-1, II Com.C.);
• For operators providing online intermediation services within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, failure to comply with the obligations laid down therein, other clauses and practices remaining governed by Title IV of Book IV ( L. 442-1, III Com.C.);
• Directly or indirectly participating in a breach of the prohibition on out-of-network resale imposed on a distributor bound by an exempt selective or exclusive distribution agreement ( L. 442-2 Com. C);
• Clauses deemed null and void, including retroactive rebates, discounts or commercial cooperation benefits, automatic granting of more favourable terms granted to competing undertakings, or prohibitions on assigning receivables ( L. 442-3 Com.C);
• Resale at a loss or announcement of resale at a loss ( L. 442-5 Com.C.);
• Imposing a minimum resale price on a distributor ( L. 442-6 Com.C.);
• For buyers of agricultural or food products, imposing an abnormally low purchase price on suppliers ( L. 442-7 Com.C);
• Regulation of remote reverse auctions ( L. 442-8 Com.C.);
• Artificially increasing or decreasing prices, particularly in remote auctions, through false information, excessive or insufficient offers, or any other fraudulent means ( L. 442-9 Com.C);
• Associations or cooperatives offering products for sale or providing services not provided for in their bylaws( L. 442-10 Com.C.);
• Use of public property belonging to the State, local authorities or public bodies to sell products or provide services under irregular conditions ( L. 442-11 Com.C);
• For cloud computing service providers, granting unlimited cloud credits or making the sale of a product or service conditional upon the conclusion of such an agreement ( L. 442-12 Com.C.).

What are the penalties for unfair commercial practices in France?

General sanctions regime under Article L. 442-4

The unfair commercial practices listed below are subject to the same sanction’s regime, as provided for in Article L. 442-4 of the French Commercial Code. The practices concerned are the following:

• L. 442-1, I, 1° Com.C: obtaining or attempting to obtain from the other party an advantage that does not correspond to any consideration or is clearly disproportionate to the consideration given;
• L. 442-1, I, 2° Com.C: subjecting or attempting to subject the other party to obligations that create a significant imbalance in the rights and obligations of the parties;
• L. 442-1, I, 3° Com.C: imposing logistical penalties in violation of Article L. 441-17;
• L. 442-1, I, 4° Com.C: practicing or obtaining discriminatory prices, payment terms, conditions, or terms of sale or purchase that are not justified by actual considerations provided for in the annual agreement, creating a competitive advantage or disadvantage;
• L. 442-1, I, 5° Com.C: failure to conduct commercial negotiations in good faith in accordance with Article L. 441-4, resulting in the contract not being concluded within the deadline specified in Article L. 441-3;
• L. 442-1, I, 6° Com.C.: subjecting a commercial partner to repeated competitive tendering procedures or calls for tenders whose frequency or modalities are liable to create a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations;
• L. 442-1, II Com.C.: implementing a substantial reduction in order volumes during contract negotiations, including temporarily, where its scale, unusual nature or the circumstances are liable to jeopardise the balance of an established commercial relationship;
• L. 442-1, III Com.C: for operators offering online intermediation services within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, failure to comply with the obligations set out in this text; other clauses or practices remain governed by Title IV of Book IV;
• Art L. 442-2 C: participating directly or indirectly in the violation of the prohibition on resale outside the network imposed on distributors bound by a selective or exclusive distribution agreement exempted under competition law;
• Art L. 442-3 C: using clauses or contracts allowing the producer to benefit from retroactive benefit of discounts (“remises”), rebates (“rabais”), or commercial cooperation; the automatic granting of more favorable terms to competing companies; prohibition on assigning claims against the other party to third parties;
• L. 442-7 Com.C: for a buyer of agricultural products or foodstuffs, imposing an abusively low selling price on its supplier;
• Article L. 442-8 C: regulation of remote reverse auctions.

For all these practices:

• the victim of such practices may have the illegal clauses or contracts declared null and void and request the restitution of undue benefits;

the French Minister for the Economy or the Public Prosecutor may request the court to:

• order the cessation of the practices;
• declare illegal clauses or contracts null and void and obtain restitution of undue benefits;

request the imposition of a civil fine, the amount of which may not exceed:

• five million euros;
• three times the amount of the benefits unduly received or obtained;
• or 5% of the turnover excluding tax generated in France by the perpetrator of the practices during the last financial year ended preceding the financial year in which the practices were implemented.

The court shall systematically order the publication, dissemination, or posting of its decision or an extract thereof, in accordance with the terms and conditions it specifies.

Practices subject to specific sanctions

• L. 442-5 Com.C: resale at a loss or the announcement of resale at a loss is punishable by a fine not exceeding 0.4% of the annual turnover excluding VAT generated in France during the last closed financial year (Art. L. 442-5, I Com.C);
• L. 442-6 Com.C: imposition of a minimum resale price on the distributor is punishable by a maximum fine of €75,000 for legal entities;
• L. 442-9 Com.C: causing an artificial increase or decrease in prices, in particular in remote auctions, by disseminating false information, excessive or insufficient offers, or by any other fraudulent means, is punishable by three years’ imprisonment and a maximum fine of €225,000 for food products. Additional penalties may also apply;
• L. 442-11 Com.C: using public property belonging to the State, local authorities or their public bodies to offer products for sale or to provide services under irregular condition is punishable by seizure on the premises, for a period not exceeding one month, of the products offered for sale and of the assets used to enable the sale of the products or the provision of services. It may also give rise to the confiscation of the products offered for sale and of the assets used to enable the sale of the products or the provision of services, and to an order to pay the Public Treasury an amount corresponding to the value of the seized products;
• L. 442-12 Com.C: for a cloud computing service provider, granting unlimited cloud computing credits credits to a person engaged in production, distribution or service activities and making the sale of a product or service conditional upon the simultaneous conclusion of such an agreement constitutes an unfair commercial practice punishable by two years’ imprisonment and a maximum fine of €1,500,000 (Article L. 132-2 of the French Consumer Code: sanctions for misleading commercial practices – « sanction despratiques commerciales trompeuses»).

Which authority enforces the rules, and what powers does it have?

The national authority responsible for enforcement is the administrative authority in charge of competition and consumer affairs: the Directorate General for Competition, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control (DGCCRF). The DGCCRF has investigative powers (Article L. 450-1 of the French Commercial Code), may issue injunctions (Article L. 470-1 of the French Commercial Code), and imposes administrative fines and sanctions for breaches of Title IV of Book IV and for non-compliance with injunctions (Article L. 470-2 of the French Commercial Code).

What did the DGCCRF’s latest enforcement report find?

According to the last DGCCRF’s 2024 report, DGCCRF «inspected 186 establishments in the dairy, cattle, pork, poultry and egg sectors in order to verify compliance with the mandatory written contractualisation between producers and their first buyers. ». The report further states that «the regulation of commercial relations and negotiations is likely to give rise to a new Egalim law, following the publication of several parliamentary reports. »In this respect, a parliamentary report on the application of the so-called «Egalim 38» law was submitted on 13 March 2024. The legislative development anticipated in that report has since materialised in Law No. 2026-796 of 18 August 2026, which substantially amended agricultural contractualisation and food-sector commercial negotiation rules with effect, for most of the relevant provisions, from 20 August 2026.

***

Frequently asked questions on unfair trading practices in France

Does French law apply if my company is not established in France?

Yes, as regards the substantive rules. France did not adopt the turnover thresholds of Directive 2019/633, so the national provisions apply to all commercial relationships involving the sale of agricultural and food products, irrespective of the nationality or economic size of the suppliers and buyers. Whether a French court will hear a dispute is a separate question.

Can we choose a law other than French law in an agri-food supply contract?

In principle yes. French law contains no specific conflict-of-law rules for agri-food supply contracts, so the choice is governed by the Rome I Regulation, under which the parties are free to choose the applicable law. Article L. 444-1.A of the Commercial Code appears to claim French law for products marketed in France, but French case law has repeatedly refused to treat restrictive trade practices as overriding mandatory rules.

Will a jurisdiction or arbitration clause be upheld by the French courts?

In practice yes. Article L. 444-1.A expressly reserves compliance with European Union law, with international conventions on jurisdiction and with arbitration. French courts may assert the exclusive jurisdiction rule only in very limited circumstances, notably where the counterparty is established in a State that has entered into no relevant convention with France.

What is the payment deadline for perishable food products in France?

Thirty days from delivery for perishable agricultural and food products, frozen or deep-frozen meat, frozen fish and prepared meals. Live cattle and fresh meat intended for consumption must be paid within 20 days of delivery, seasonal fruit and vegetables within 30 days of the end of the month of delivery, and non-perishable agricultural and food products within 60 days (Article L. 441-11 of the Commercial Code).

By what date must the annual agreement with a distributor be signed?

Before 1 March or 31 January (when supplier’s turnover is less than €350 million) of each year, in the form of either a single document or an annual framework agreement supplemented by specific implementation agreements. Missing that deadline is punishable by an administrative fine of up to €200,000 for a natural person and €1,000,000 for a legal entity, doubled in the event of a repeated infringement within two years.

Must a contract with an agricultural producer include a price revision clause?

Yes. The contract between a producer and its first buyer must provide for automatic upward and downward price revision mechanisms, based in particular on indicators relating to agricultural production costs and to changes in those costs. The absence of such a clause is punishable by an administrative fine of up to €75,000 for a natural person and €375,000 for a legal entity.

How long must a supply contract with an agricultural producer last?

At least three years, and the contract must include a clause to that effect. The term may be extended up to a maximum of five years where an interprofessional agreement so provides (Article L. 631-24, III, 5° of the Rural and Maritime Fishing Code).