France: Ambush marketing and the Paris 2024 Olympic Games

2024年3月4日

  • 法国
  • 分销协议
  • 商标和专利

When selling health-related products, the question frequently arises as to which product category, and therefore which regulatory regime, they fall under. This question often arises when distinguishing between food supplements and medicinal products. But in other constellations, too, difficult questions of demarcation arise, which must be answered with a view to legally compliant marketing.

In a highly interesting case, the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) of Düsseldorf, Germany, recently had to classify a CBD-containing (Cannabidiol) mouth spray that was explicitly advertised by its manufacturer as a “cosmetic” and therefore not suitable for human consumption. The Ingredients of the product were labelled: « Cannabis sativa seed oil, cannabidiol from cannabis extract, tincture or resin, cannabis sativa leaf extract ».

The Product is additionally also labelled as follows: “Cosmetic oral care spray with hemp leaf extract. » The Instructions for use are: « Spray a maximum of 3 sprays a day into the mouth as desired. Spit out after 30 seconds and do not swallow. »

A spray of the Product contains 10 mg CBD. This results in a maximum daily dose of 30 mg CBD as specified by the company.

At the same time, however, it was pointed out that the “consumption” of a spray shot was harmless to health.

The mouth spray could therefore be consumed like a food, but was declared as a “cosmetic”. This is precisely where the court had to examine whether the prohibition order based on food law was lawful.

For the definition of cosmetic products Article 2 sentence 4 lit. e) Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 refers to Directive 76/768/EEC. This was replaced by Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009. Cosmetic products are defined in Article 2(1)(a) as follows: “‘cosmetic product’ means any substance or mixture intended to be placed in contact with the external parts of the human body (epidermis, hair system, nails, lips and external genital organs) or with the teeth and the mucous membranes of the oral cavity with a view exclusively or mainly to cleaning them, perfuming them, changing their appearance, protecting them, keeping them in good condition or correcting body odours ”.

Here too, it is not the composition of the product that is decisive, but its intended purpose, which is to be determined on the basis of objective criteria according to general public opinion based on concrete evidence.

According to the system of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002, Article 2 sentence 1 first defines foodstuffs in general and then excludes cosmetic products under sentence 4 lit. e). According to the definition in Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009, cosmetic products must have an exclusive or at least predominant cosmetic purpose. It can be concluded from this system that the exclusivity or predominance must be positively established. If it is not possible to determine which purpose predominates, the product is a foodstuff.

The Düsseldorf Administrative Court had to deal with this question in the aforementioned legal dispute brought by the distributor against an official prohibition order in the form of a so-called general ruling („Allgemeinverfügung“). By notice dated July 11, 2020, the competent authority issued a general ruling prohibiting the marketing of foodstuffs containing “cannabidiol (as ‘CBD isolates’ or ‘hemp extracts enriched with CBD’)” in their urban area. The company, based in this city, offered the mouth spray described above.

In a ruling dated 25.10.2024 (Courts Ref. : 26 K 2072/23), the court dismissed the company’s claim. The court’s main arguments were :

  1. Classification as food: the CBD spray was correctly classified as food by the authority, as it was reasonable to expect that it could be swallowed despite indications to the contrary. According to an objective perception of the market, there is a now established expectation of an average informed, attentive and reasonable consumer to the effect that CBD oils are intended as “lifestyle” products for oral ingestion, from which consumers hope for positive health effects The labelling as “cosmetic” was refuted by the objective consumer expectations and the nature of the application.
  2. No medicinal product status: Due to the low dosage in this case (max. 30 mg CBD per day), the product was not classified as a functional medicinal product, as there was no sufficiently proven pharmacological effect.
  3. Legal basis of the injunction: The prohibition of the sale of the products by the defendant was based on a general order, which was confirmed as lawful by the court.

In the ruling, the court emphasizes the objective consumer expectation and clarifies that products cannot be exempted from a different regulatory classification by the authorities or the courts solely by their labelling.

Conclusion: The decision presented underlines the considerable importance of the “correct” classification of a health product in the respective legal product category. In addition to the classic distinction between foodstuffs (food supplements) and medicinal products, comparable issues also arise with other product types. In this case in the constellation of cosmetics versus food – combined with the special legal component of the use of CBD.

The author of this article is Matthias Hesshaus

Commercial agents have specific regulations with rights and obligations that are “mandatory”: those who sign an agency contract cannot derogate from them. Answering whether an influencer can be an agent is essential because, if he or she is an agent, the agent regulations will apply to him or her.

Let’s take it one step at a time. The influencer we will talk about is the person who, with their actions and comments (blogs, social media accounts, videos, events, or a bit of everything), talks to their followers about the advantages of certain products or services identified with a certain third-party brand. In exchange for this, the influencer is paid.[1]

A commercial agent is someone who promotes the contracting of others’ products or services, does so in a stable way, and gets paid in return. He or she can also conclude the contract, but this is not essential.

The law imposes certain obligations and guarantees rights to those signing an agency contract. If the influencer is considered an “agent”, he or she should also have them. And there are several of them: for example, the duration, the notice to be given to terminate the contract, the obligations of the parties… And the most relevant, the right of the agent to receive compensation at the end of the relationship for the clientele that has been generated. If an influencer is an agent, he would also have this right.

How can an influencer be assessed as an agent? For that we must analyse two things: (a) the contract (and be careful because there is a contract, even if it is not written) and (b) how the parties have behaved.

The elements that, in my opinion, are most relevant to conclude that an influencer is an agent would be the following:

 

a) the influencer promotes the contracting of services or the purchase of products and does so independently.

The contract will indicate what the influencer must do. It will be clearer to consider him as an agent if his comments encourage contracting: for example, if they include a link to the manufacturer’s website, if he offers a discount code, if he allows orders to be placed with him. And if he does so as an independent “professional”, and not as an employee (with a timetable, means, instructions).

It may be more difficult to consider him as an agent if he limits himself to talking about the benefits of the product or service, appearing in advertising as a brand image, and using a certain product, and speaking well of it. The important thing, in my opinion, is to examine whether the influencer’s activity is aimed at getting people to buy the product he or she is talking about, or whether what he or she is doing is more generic persuasion (appearing in advertising, lending his or her image to a product, carrying out demonstrations of its use), or even whether he or she is only seeking to promote himself or herself as a vehicle for general information (for example, influencers who make comparisons of products without trying to get people to buy one or the other). In the first case (trying to get people to buy the product) it would be easier to consider it as an “agent”, and less so in the other examples.

 

b) this “promotion” is done in a continuous or stable manner.

Be careful because this continuity or stability does not mean that the contract has to be of indefinite duration. Rather, it is the opposite of a sporadic relationship. A one-year contract may be sufficient, while several unconnected interventions, even if they last longer, may not be sufficient.

In this case, influencers who make occasional comments, who intervene with isolated actions, who limit themselves to making comparisons without promoting the purchase of one or the other, and even if all this leads to sales, even if their comments are frequent and even if they can have a great influence on the behavior of their followers, would be excluded as agents.

 

c) they receive remuneration for their activity.

An influencer who is remunerated based on sales (e.g., by promoting a discount code, a specific link, or referring to your website for orders) can more easily be considered as an agent. But also, if he or she only receives a fixed amount for their promotion. On the other hand, influencers who do not receive any remuneration from the brand (e.g. someone who talks about the benefits of a product in comparison with others, but without linking it to its promotion) would be excluded.

 

Conclusion

The borderline between what qualifies an influencer as an agent and what does not can be very thin, especially because contracts are often not unambiguous and sometimes their services are multiple. The most important thing is to carefully analyse the contract and the parties’ behaviour.

An influencer could be considered a commercial agent to the extent that his or her activity promotes the contracting of the product (not simply if he or she carries out informative or image work), that it is done on a stable basis (and not merely anecdotal or sporadic) and in exchange for remuneration.

To assess the specific situation, it is essential to analyse the contract (if it is written, this is easier) and the parties’ behaviour.

In short, to draw up a contract with an influencer or, if it has already been signed, but you want to conclude it, you will have to pay attention to these elements. As an influencer you may have a strong interest in being considered an agent at the end of the contract and thus be entitled to compensation, while as employer you will prefer the opposite.

FINAL NOTE. In Spain and at the date of this comment (9 June 2024) I am not aware of any judgement dealing with this issue. My proposal is based on my experience of more than 30 years advising and litigating on agency contracts. On the other hand, and as far as I know, there is at least one judgment in Rome (Italy) dealing with the matter: Tribunale di Roma; Sezione Lavoro 4º, St. 2615 of 4 March 2024; R. G. n. 38445/2022.

The commercial agent has the right to obtain certain information about the sales of the principal. The Spanish Law on Agency Contracts provides (15.2 LCA) that the agent has the right to demand to see the accounts of the principal in order to verify all matters relating to the commissions due to him. And also, to be provided with the information available to the principal and necessary to verify the amount of such commissions.

This article is in line with the 1986 Commercial Agents Directive, according to which (12.3) the agent is entitled to demand to be provided with all information at the disposal of the principal, particularly an extract from the books of account, which is necessary to verify the amount of commission due to the agent. This may not be altered to the detriment of the commercial agent by agreement.

The question is, does this right remain even after the termination of the agency contract? In other words: once the agency contract is terminated, can the agent request the information and documentation mentioned in these articles and is the Principal obliged to provide it?

In our opinion, the rule does not say anything that limits this right, rather the opposite is to be expected. Therefore, to the extent that there is still any possible commission that may arise from such verification, the answer must be yes. Let us see.

The right to demand the production of accounts exists so that the agent can verify the amount of commissions. And the agent is entitled to commissions for acts and operations concluded during the term of the contract (art. 12 LCA), but also for acts or operations concluded after the termination of the contract (art. 13 LCA), and for operations not carried out due to circumstances attributable to the principal (art. 17 LCA). In addition, the agent is entitled to have the commission accrued at the time when the act or transaction should have been executed (art. 14 LCA).

All these transactions can take place after the conclusion of the contract. Consider the usual situation where orders are placed during the contract but are accepted or executed afterwards. To reduce the agent’s right to be informed only during the term of the contract would be to limit his entitlement to the corresponding commission unduly. And it should be borne in mind that the amount of the commissions during the last five years may also influence the calculation of the client (goodwill) indemnity (art. 28 LCA), so that the agent’s interest in knowing them is twofold: what he would receive as commission, and what could increase the basis for future indemnity.

This has been confirmed, for example, by the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) of Madrid (AAP 227/2017, of 29 June [ECLI:ES:APM:2017:2873A]) which textually states:

[…] art. 15.2 of the Agency Contract Act provides for the right of the agent to demand the exhibition of the Principal’s accounts in the particulars necessary to verify everything relating to the commissions corresponding to him, as well as to be provided with the information available to the Principal and necessary to verify the amount. This does not prevent, […], the agency contract having already been terminated, as this does not imply that commissions would cease to accrue for policies, contracted with the mediation of the agent, which remain in force.

The question then arises as to whether this right to information is unlimited in time. And here the answer would be in the negative. The limitation of the right to receive information would be linked to the statute of limitations of the right to claim the corresponding commission. If the right to receive the commission were undoubtedly time-barred, it could be argued that it would not be possible to receive information about it. But for such an exception, the statute of limitations must be clear, therefore, taking into account possible interruptions due to claims, even extrajudicial ones. In case of doubt, it will be necessary to recognise the right to demand the information, without prejudice to later invoking and recognising the impossibility of claiming the commission if the right is time-barred. And for this we must consider the limitation period for claiming commissions (in general, three years) and that of the right to claim compensation for clientele (one year).

In short: it does not seem that the right to receive information and to examine the principal’s documentation is limited by the term of the agency contract; although, on the other hand, it would be appropriate to analyse the possible limitation period for claiming commissions. In the absence of a clear answer to this question, the right to information should, in our opinion, prevail, without prejudice to the fact that the result may not entitle the claim because it is time-barred.

SUMMARY: In large-scale events such as the Paris Olympics certain companies will attempt to “wildly” associate their brand with the event through a practice called “ambush marketing”, defined by caselaw as “an advertising strategy implemented by a company in order to associate its commercial image with that of an event, and thus to benefit from the media impact of said event, without paying the related rights and without first obtaining the event organizer’s authorization” (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912). A risky and punishable practice, that might sometimes yet be an option yet.

Key takeaways

  • Ambush marketing might be a punished practice but is not prohibited as such;
  • As a counterpart of their investment, sponsors and official partners benefit from an extensive legal protection against all forms of ambush marketing in the event concerned, through various general texts (counterfeiting, parasitism, intellectual property) or more specific ones (e.g. sport law);
  • The Olympics Games are subject to specific regulations that further strengthen this protection, particularly in terms of intellectual property.
  • But these rights are not absolute, and they are still thin opportunities for astute ambush marketing.

The protection offered to sponsors and official partners of sporting and cultural events from ambush marketing

With a budget of over 4 billion euros, the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games are financed mostly by various official partners and sponsors, who in return benefit from a right to use Olympic and Paralympic properties to be able to associate their own brand image and distinctive signs with these events.

Ambush marketing is not punishable as such under French law, but several scattered texts provide extensive protection against ambush marketing for sponsors and partners of sporting or cultural continental-wide or world-wide events. Indeed, sponsors are legitimately entitled to peacefully enjoy the rights offered to them in return for large-scale investments in events such as the FIFA or rugby World Cups, or the Olympic Games.

In particular, official sponsors and organizers of such events may invoke:

  • the “classic” protections offered by intellectual property law (trademark law and copyright) in the context of infringement actions based on the French Intellectual Property Code,
  • tort law (parasitism and unfair competition based on article 1240 of the French Civil Code);
  • consumer law (misleading commercial practices) based on the French Consumer Code,
  • but also more specific texts such as the protection of the exploitation rights of sports federations and sports event organizers derived from the events or competitions they organize, as set out in article L.333-1 of the French Sports Code, which gives sports event organizers an exploitation monopoly.

The following ambush marketing practices were sanctioned on the abovementioned grounds:

  • The use of a tennis competition name and of the trademark associated with it during the sporting event: The organization of online bets, by an online betting operator, on the Roland Garros tournament, using the protected sign and trademark Roland Garros to target the matches on which the bets were organized. The unlawful exploitation of the sporting event, was punished and 400 K€ were allowed as damages, based on article L. 333-1 of the French Sports Code, since only the French Tennis Federation (F.F.T.) owns the right to exploit Roland Garros. The use of the trademark was also punished as counterfeiting (with 300 K€ damages) and parasitism (with 500 K€ damages) (Paris Court of Appeal, Oct. 14, 2009, Case No 08/19179);
  • An advertising campaign taking place during a film festival and reproducing the event’s trademark: The organization, during the Cannes Film Festival, of a digital advertising campaign by a cosmetics brand through the publication on its social networks of videos showing the beauty makeovers of the brand’s muses, in some of which the official poster of the Cannes Film Festival was visible, one of which reproduced the registered trademark of the “Palme d’Or”, was punished on the grounds of copyright infringement and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Judicial Court, Dec. 11, 2020, Case No19/08543);
  • An advertising campaign aimed at falsely claiming to be an official partner of an event: The use, during the Cannes Film Festival, of the slogan “official hairdresser for women” together with the expressions “Cannes” and “Cannes Festival”, and other publications falsely leading the public to believe that the hairdresser was an official partner, to the detriment of the only official hairdresser of the Cannes festival, was punished on the grounds of unfair competition and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912).

These financial penalties may be combined with injunctions to cease these behaviors, and/or publication in the press under penalty.

An even greater protection for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games

The Paris 2024 Olympic Games are also subject to specific regulations.

Firstly, Article L.141-5 of the French Sports Code, enacted for the benefit of the “Comité national olympique et sportif français” (CNOSF) and the “Comité de l’organisation des Jeux Olympiques et Paralympiques de Paris 2024” (COJOP), protects Olympic signs such as the national Olympic emblems, but also the emblems, the flag, motto and Olympic symbol, Olympic anthem, logo, mascot, slogan and posters of the Olympic Games, the year of the Olympic Games “city + year”, the terms “Jeux Olympiques”, “Olympisme”, “Olympiade”, “JO”, “olympique”, “olympien” and “olympienne”. Under no circumstances may these signs be reproduced or even imitated by third-party companies. The COJOP has also published a guide to the protection of the Olympic trademark, outlining the protected symbols, trademarks and signs, as well as the protection of the official partners of the Olympic Games.

Secondly, Law no. 2018-202 of March 26, 2018 on the organization of the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games adds even more specific prohibitions, such as the reservation for official sponsors of advertising space located near Olympic venues, or located on the Olympic and Paralympic torch route. This protection is unique in the context of the Olympic Games, but usually unregulated in the context of simple sporting events.

The following practices, for example, have already been sanctioned on the above-mentioned grounds:

  • Reproduction of a logo imitating the well-known “Olympic” trademark on a clothing collection: The marketing of a collection of clothing, during the 2016 Olympic Games, bearing a logo (five hearts in the colors of the 5 Olympic colors intersecting in the image of the Olympic logo) imitating the Olympic symbol in association with the words “RIO” and “RIO 2016”, was punished on the grounds of parasitism (10 K€ damages) and articles L. 141-5 of the French Sports Code (35 K€) and L. 713-1 of the French Intellectual Property Code (10 K€ damages) (Paris Judicial Court, June 7, 2018, Case No16/10605);
  • The organization of a contest on social networks using protected symbols: During the 2018 Olympic Games in PyeongChang, a car rental company organized an online game inviting Internet users to nominate the athletes they wanted to win a clock radio, associated with the hashtags “#JO2018” (“#OJ2018”), “#Jeuxolympiques” (“#Olympicsgame”) or “C’est parti pour les jeux Olympiques” (“let’s go for the Olympic Games”) without authorization from the CNOSF, owner of these distinctive signs under the 2018 law and article L.141-5 of the French Sport Code and punished on these grounds with 20 K€ damages and of 10 K€ damages for parasitism (Paris Judicial Court, May 29, 2020, n°18/14115).

These regulations offer official partners greater protection for their investments against ambush marketing practices from non-official sponsors.

Some marketing operations might be exempted

An analysis of case law and promotional practices nonetheless reveals the contours of certain advertising practices that could be authorized (i.e. not sanctioned by the above-mentioned texts), provided they are skillfully prepared and presented. Here are a few exemples :

  • Communication of information for advertising purposes: The use of the results of a rugby match and the announcement of a forthcoming match in a newspaper to promote a motor vehicle and its distinctive features was deemed lawful: “France 13 Angleterre 24 – the Fiat 500 congratulates England on its victory and looks forward to seeing the French team on March 9 for France-Italy” (France 13 Angleterre 24 – la Fiat 500 félicite l’Angleterre pour sa victoire et donne rendez-vous à l’équipe de France le 9 mars pour France-Italie) the judges having considered that this publication “merely reproduces a current sporting result, acquired and made public on the front page of the sports newspaper, and refers to a future match also known as already announced by the newspaper in a news article” (Court of cassation, May 20, 2014, Case No 13-12.102).
  • Sponsorship of athletes, including those taking part in Olympic competitions: Subject to compliance with the applicable regulatory framework, particularly as regards models, any company may enter into partnerships with athletes taking part in the Olympic Games, for example by donating clothing bearing the desired logo or brand, which they could wear during their participation in the various events. Athletes may also, under certain conditions, broadcast acknowledgements from their partner (even if unofficial). Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter governs the use of athletes’, coaches’ and officials’ images for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.

The combined legal and marketing approach to the conception and preparation of the message of such a communication operation is essential to avoid legal proceedings, particularly on the grounds of parasitism; one might therefore legitimately contemplate advertising campaigns, particularly clever, or even malicious ones.

In this first episode of Legalmondo’s Distribution Talks series, I spoke with Ignacio Alonso, a Madrid-based lawyer with extensive experience in international commercial distribution.

Main discussion points:

  • in Spain, there is no specific law for distribution agreements, which are governed by the general rules of the Commercial Code;
  • therefore, it is essential to draft a clear and comprehensive contract, which will be the primary source of the parties’ rights and obligations;
  • it is also good to be aware of Spanish case law on commercial distribution, which in some cases applies the law on commercial agency by analogy.
  • the most common issues involving foreign producers distributing in Spain arise at the time of termination of the relationship, mainly because case law grants the terminated distributor an indemnity of clientele or goodwill if similar prerequisites to those in the agency regulations apply.
  • another frequent dispute concerns the adequacy of the notice period for terminating the contract, especially if there is no agreement between the parties: the advice is to follow what the agency regulations stipulate and thus establish a minimum notice period of one month for each year of the contract’s duration, up to 6 months for agreements lasting more than five years;
  • regarding dispute resolution tools, mediation is an option that should be carefully considered because it is quick, inexpensive, and allows a shared solution to be sought flexibly without disrupting the business relationship.
  • if mediation fails, the parties can provide for recourse to arbitration or state court. The choice depends on the case’s specific circumstances, and one factor in favor of jurisdiction is the possibility of appeal, which is excluded in the case of arbitration.

Go deeper

Summary

On 1 June 2022, Regulation EU n. 720/2022, i.e.: the new Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (hereinafter: “VBER”), replaced the previous version (Regulation EU n. 330/2010), expired on 31 May 2022.

The new VBER and the new vertical guidelines (hereinafter: “Guidelines”) have received the main evidence gathered during the lifetime of the previous VBER and contain some relevant provisions affecting the discipline of all B2B agreements among businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain.

In this article, we will focus on the impact of the new VBER on sales through digital platforms, listing the main novelties impacting distribution chains, including a platform for marketing products/services.

The general discipline of vertical agreements

Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibits all agreements that prevent, restrict, or distort competition within the EU market, listing the main types, e.g.: price fixing; market partitioning; limitations on production/development/investment; unfair terms, etc.

However, Article 101(3) TFEU exempts from such restrictions the agreements that contribute to improving the EU market, to be identified in a special category Regulation.

The VBER establishes the category of vertical agreements (i.e., agreements between businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain), determining which of these agreements are exempted from Article 101(1) TFEU prohibition.

In short, vertical agreements are presumed to be exempted (and therefore valid) if they do not contain so-called “hardcore restrictions” (i.e., severe restrictions of competition, such as an absolute ban on sales in a territory or the manufacturer’s determination of the distributor’s resale price) and if neither party’s market share exceeds 30%.

The exempted agreements benefit from what has been termed the “safe harbour” of the VBER. In contrast, the others will be subject to the general prohibition of Article 101(1) TFEU unless they can benefit from an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

The innovations introduced by the new VBER to online platforms

The first relevant aspect concerns the classification of the platforms, as the European Commission excluded that the online platform generally meets the conditions to be categorized as agency agreements.

While there have never been doubts concerning platforms that operate by purchasing and reselling products (classic example: Amazon Retail), some have arisen concerning those platforms that merely promote the products of third parties without carrying out the activity of resale (classic example: Amazon Marketplace).

With this statement, the European Commission wanted to clear the field of doubt, making explicit that intermediation service providers (such as online platforms) qualify as suppliers (as opposed to commercial agents) under the VBER. This reflects the approach of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 (“P2B Regulation”), which has, for the first time, dictated a specific discipline for digital platforms. It provided for a set of rules to create a “fair, transparent, and predictable environment” for smaller businesses and customers” and for the rationale of the Digital Markets Act, banning certain practices used by large platforms acting as “gatekeepers”.

Therefore, all contracts concluded between manufacturers and platforms (defined as ‘providers of online intermediation services’) are subject to all the restrictions imposed by the VBER. These include the price, the territories to which or the customers to whom the intermediated goods or services may be sold, or the restrictions relating to online advertising and selling.

Thus, to give an example, the operator of a platform may not impose a fixed or minimum sale price for a transaction promoted through the platform.

The second most impactful aspect concerns hybrid platforms, i.e., competing in the relevant market to sell intermediated goods or services. Amazon is the most well-known example, as it is a provider of intermediation services (“Amazon Marketplace”), and – at the same time – it distributes the products of those parties (“Amazon Retail”). We have previously explored the distinction between those 2 business models (and the consequences in terms of intellectual property infringement) here.

The new VBER explicitly does not apply to hybrid platforms. Therefore, the agreements concluded among such platforms and manufacturers are subject to the limitations of the TFEU, as such providers may have the incentive to favour their sales and the ability to influence the outcome of competition between undertakings that use their online intermediation services.

Those agreements must be assessed individually under Article 101 of the TFEU, as they do not necessarily restrict competition within the meaning of TFEU, or they may fulfil the conditions of an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

The third very relevant aspect concerns the parity obligations (also referred to as Most Favoured Nation Clauses, or MFNs), i.e., the contract provisions in which a seller (directly or indirectly) agrees to give the buyer the best terms it makes available to any other buyer.

Indeed, platforms’ contractual terms often contain parity obligation clauses to prevent users from offering their products/services at lower prices or on better conditions on their websites or other platforms.

The new VBER deals explicitly with parity clauses, making a distinction between clauses whose purpose is to prohibit users of a platform from selling goods or services on more favourable terms through competing platforms (so-called “wide parity clauses”), and clauses that prohibit sales on more favourable terms only in respect of channels operated directly by the users (so-called “narrow parity clauses”).

Wide parity clauses do not benefit from the VBER exemption; therefore, such obligations must be assessed individually under Article 101(3) TFEU.

On the other hand, narrow parity clauses continue to benefit from the exemption already granted by the old VBER if they do not exceed the threshold of 30% of the relevant market share set out in Article 3 of the new VBER. However, the new Guidelines warn against using overly narrow parity obligations by online platforms covering a significant share of users, stating that if there is no evidence of pro-competitive effects, the benefit of the block exemption is likely to be withdrawn.

Impact and takeaways

The new VBER entered into force on 1 June 2022 and is already applicable to agreements signed after that date. Agreements already in force on 31 May 2022 that satisfy the conditions for exemption under the current VBER but do not satisfy the requirements under the new VBER shall benefit from a one-year transitional period.

The new regime will be the playing field for all platform-driven sales over the next 12 years (the regulation expires on 31 May 2034). Currently, the rather restrictive novelties on hybrid platforms and parity obligations will likely necessitate substantial revisions to existing trade agreements.

Here, then, are some tips for managing contracts and relationships with online platforms:

  • the new VBER is the right opportunity to review the existing distribution networks. The revision will have to consider not only the new regulatory limits (e.g., the ban on wide parity clauses) but also the new discipline reserved for hybrid platforms and dual distribution to coordinate the different distribution channels as efficiently as possible, by the stakes set by the new VBER and the Guidelines;
  • platforms are likely to play an even greater role during the next decade; it is, therefore, essential to consider these sales channels from the outset, coordinating them with the other existing ones (retail, direct sales, distributors, etc.) to avoid jeopardizing the marketing of products or services;
  • the European legislator’s attention toward platforms is growing. Looking up from the VBER, one should not forget that they are subject to a multitude of other European regulations, which are gradually regulating the sector and which must be considered when concluding contracts with platforms. The reference is not only to the recent Digital Market Act and P2B Regulation but also to the protection of IP rights on platforms, which – as we have already seen – is still an open issue.

Summary

To avoid disputes with important suppliers, it is advisable to plan purchases over the medium and long term and not operate solely on the basis of orders and order confirmations. Planning makes it possible to agree on the duration of the ‘supply agreement, minimum volumes of products to be delivered and delivery schedules, prices, and the conditions under which prices can be varied over time.
The use of a framework purchase agreement can help avoid future uncertainties and allows various options to be used to manage commodity price fluctuations depending on the type of products , such as automatic price indexing or agreement to renegotiate in the event of commodity fluctuations beyond a certain set tolerance period.

I read in a press release: “These days, the glass industry is sending wine companies new unilateral contract amendments with price changes of 20%…”

What can one do to avoid the imposition of price increases by suppliers? 

  • Know your rights and act in an informed manner
  • Plan and organise your supply chain

Does my supplier have the right to increase prices?

If contracts have already been concluded, e.g., orders have already been confirmed by the supplier, the answer is often no.

It is not legitimate to request a price change. It is much less legitimate to communicate it unilaterally, with the threat of cancelling the order or not delivering the goods if the request is not granted.

What if he tells me it is force majeure?

That’s wrong: increased costs are not a force majeure but rather an unforeseen excessive onerousness, which hardly happens.

What if the supplier canceled the order, unilaterally increased the price, or did not deliver the goods?

He would be in breach of contract and liable to pay damages for violating his contractual obligations.

How can one avoid a tug-of-war with suppliers?

The tools are there. You have to know them and use them.

It is necessary to plan purchases in the medium term, agreeing with suppliers on a schedule in which are set out:

  • the quantities of products to be ordered
  • the delivery terms
  • the durationof the agreement
  • the pricesof the products or raw materials
  • the conditions under which prices can be varied

There is a very effective instrument to do so: a framework purchase agreement.

Using a framework purchase agreement, the parties negotiate the above elements, which will be valid for the agreed period.

Once the agreement is concluded, product orders will follow, governed by the framework agreement, without the need to renegotiate the content of individual deliveries each time.

For an in-depth discussion of this contract, see this article.

  • “Yes, but my suppliers will never sign it!”

Why not? Ask them to explain the reason.

This type of agreement is in the interest of both parties. It allows planning future orders and grants certainty as to whether, when, and how much the parties can change the price.

In contrast, acting without written agreements forces the parties to operate in an environment of uncertainty. Suppliers can request price increases from one day to the next and refuse supply if the changes are not accepted.

How are price changes for future supplies regulated?

Depending on the type of products or services and the raw materials or energy relevant in determining the final price, there are several possibilities.

  • The first option is to index the price automatically. E.g., if the cost of a barrel of Brent oil increases/decreases by 10%, the party concerned is entitled to request a corresponding adjustment of the product’s price in all orders placed as of the following week.
  • An alternative is to provide for a price renegotiation in the event of a fluctuation of the reference commodity. E.g., suppose the LME Aluminium index of the London Stock Exchange increases above a certain threshold. In that case, the interested party may request a price renegotiationfor orders in the period following the increase.

What if the parties do not agree on new prices?

It is possible to terminate the contract or refer the price determination to a third party, who would act as arbitrator and set the new prices for future orders.

Summary

The framework supply contract is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier) that take place over a certain period of time. This agreement determines the main elements of future contracts such as price, product volumes, delivery terms, technical or quality specifications, and the duration of the agreement.

The framework contract is useful for ensuring continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a certain product that is essential for planning industrial or commercial activity. While the general terms and conditions of purchase or sale are the rules that apply to all suppliers or customers of the company. The framework contract is advisable to be concluded with essential suppliers for the continuity of business activity, in general or in relation to a particular project.

What I am talking about in this article:

  • What is the supply framework agreement?
  • What is the function of the supply framework agreement?
  • The difference with the general conditions of sale or purchase
  • When to enter a purchase framework agreement?
  • When is it beneficial to conclude a sales framework agreement?
  • The content of the supply framework agreement
  • Price revision clause and hardship
  • Delivery terms in the supply framework agreement
  • The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts
  • International sales: applicable law and dispute resolution arrangements

What is a framework supply agreement?

It is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier), which will take place over a certain period.

It is therefore referred to as a “framework agreement” because it is an agreement that establishes the rules of a future series of sales and purchase contracts, determining their primary elements (such as the price, the volumes of products to be sold and purchased, the delivery terms of the products, and the duration of the contract).

After concluding the framework agreement, the parties will exchange orders and order confirmations, entering a series of autonomous sales contracts without re-discussing the covenants already defined in the framework agreement.

Depending on one’s point of view, this agreement is also called a sales framework agreement (if the seller/supplier uses it) or a purchasing framework agreement (if the customer proposes it).

What is the function of the framework supply agreement?

It is helpful to arrange a framework agreement in all cases where the parties intend to proceed with a series of purchases/sales of products over time and are interested in giving stability to the commercial agreement by determining its main elements.

In particular, the purchase framework agreement may be helpful to a company that wishes to ensure continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a specific product that is essential for planning its industrial or commercial activity (raw material, semi-finished product, component).

By concluding the framework agreement, the company can obtain, for example, a commitment from the supplier to supply a particular minimum volume of products, at a specific price, with agreed terms and technical specifications, for a certain period.

This agreement is also beneficial, at the same time, to the seller/supplier, which can plan sales for that period and organize, in turn, the supply chain that enables it to procure the raw materials and components necessary to produce the products.

What is the difference between a purchase or sales framework agreement and the general terms and conditions?

Whereas the framework agreement is an agreement that is used with one or more suppliers for a specific product and a certain time frame, determining the essential elements of future contracts, the general purchase (or sales) conditions are the rules that apply to all the company’s suppliers (or customers).

The first agreement, therefore, is negotiated and defined on a case-by-case basis. At the same time, the general conditions are prepared unilaterally by the company, and the customers or suppliers (depending on whether they are sales or purchase conditions) adhere to and accept that the general conditions apply to the individual order and/or future contracts.

The two agreements might also co-exist: in that case; it is a good idea to specify which contract should prevail in the event of a discrepancy between the different provisions (usually, this hierarchy is envisaged, ranging from the special to the general: order – order confirmation; framework agreement; general terms and conditions of purchase).

When is it important to conclude a purchase framework agreement?

It is beneficial to conclude this agreement when dealing with a mono-supplier or a supplier that would be very difficult to replace if it stopped selling products to the purchasing company.

The risks one aims to avoid or diminish are so-called stock-outs, i.e., supply interruptions due to the supplier’s lack of availability of products or because the products are available, but the parties cannot agree on the delivery time or sales price.

Another result that can be achieved is to bind a strategic supplier for a certain period by agreeing that it will reserve an agreed share of production for the buyer on predetermined terms and conditions and avoid competition with offers from third parties interested in the products for the duration of the agreement.

When is it helpful to conclude a sales framework agreement?

This agreement allows the seller/supplier to plan sales to a particular customer and thus to plan and organize its production and logistical capacity for the agreed period, avoiding extra costs or delays.

Planning sales also makes it possible to correctly manage financial obligations and cash flows with a medium-term vision, harmonizing commitments and investments with the sales to one’s customers.

What is the content of the supply framework agreement?

There is no standard model of this agreement, which originated from business practice to meet the requirements indicated above.

Generally, the agreement provides for a fixed period (e.g., 12 months) in which the parties undertake to conclude a series of purchases and sales of products, determining the price and terms of supply and the main covenants of future sales contracts.

The most important clauses are:

  • the identification of products and technical specifications (often identified in an annex)
  • the minimum/maximum volume of supplies
  • the possible obligation to purchase/sell a minimum/maximum volume of products
  • the schedule of supplies
  • the delivery times
  • the determination of the price and the conditions for its possible modification (see also the next paragraph)
  • impediments to performance (Force Majeure)
  • cases of Hardship
  • penalties for delay or non-performance or for failure to achieve the agreed volumes
  • the hierarchy between the framework agreement and the orders and any other contracts between the parties
  • applicable law and dispute resolution (especially in international agreements)

How to handle price revision in a supply contract?

A crucial clause, especially in times of strong fluctuations in the prices of raw materials, transport, and energy, is the price revision clause.

In the absence of an agreement on this issue, the parties bear the risk of a price increase by undertaking to respect the conditions initially agreed upon; except in exceptional cases (where the fluctuation is strong, affects a short period, and is caused by unforeseeable events), it isn’t straightforward to invoke the supervening excessive onerousness, which allows renegotiating the price, or the contract to be terminated.

To avoid the uncertainty generated by price fluctuations, it is advisable to agree in the contract on the mechanisms for revising the price (e.g., automatic indexing following the quotation of raw materials). The so-called Hardship or Excessive Onerousness clause establishes what price fluctuation limits are accepted by the parties and what happens if the variations go beyond these limits, providing for the obligation to renegotiate the price or the termination of the contract if no agreement is reached within a certain period.

How to manage delivery terms in a supply agreement?

Another fundamental pact in a medium to long-term supply relationship concerns delivery terms. In this case, it is necessary to reconcile the purchaser’s interest in respecting the agreed dates with the supplier’s interest in avoiding claims for damages in the event of a delay, especially in the case of sales requiring intercontinental transport.

The first thing to be clarified in this regard concerns the nature of delivery deadlines: are they essential or indicative? In the first case, the party affected has the right to terminate (i.e., wind up) the agreement in the event of non-compliance with the term; in the second case, due diligence, information, and timely notification of delays may be required, whereas termination is not a remedy that may be automatically invoked in the event of a delay.

A useful instrument in this regard is the penalty clause: with this covenant, it is established that for each day/week/month of delay, a sum of money is due by way of damages in favor of the party harmed by the delay.

If quantified correctly and not excessively, the penalty is helpful for both parties because it makes it possible to predict the damages that may be claimed for the delay, quantifying them in a fair and determined sum. Consequently, the seller is not exposed to claims for damages related to factors beyond his control. At the same time, the buyer can easily calculate the compensation for the delay without the need for further proof.

The same mechanism, among other things, may be adopted to govern the buyer’s delay in accepting delivery of the goods.

Finally, it is a good idea to specify the limit of the penalty (e.g.,10 percent of the price of the goods) and a maximum period of grace for the delay, beyond which the party concerned is entitled to terminate the contract by retaining the penalty.

The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts

A situation that is often confused with excessive onerousness, but is, in fact, quite different, is that of Force Majeure, i.e., the supervening impossibility of performance of the contractual obligation due to any event beyond the reasonable control of the party affected, which could not have been reasonably foreseen and the effects of which cannot be overcome by reasonable efforts.

The function of this clause is to set forth clearly when the parties consider that Force Majeure may be invoked, what specific events are included (e.g., a lock-down of the production plant by order of the authority), and what are the consequences for the parties’ obligations (e.g., suspension of the obligation for a certain period, as long as the cause of impossibility of performance lasts, after which the party affected by performance may declare its intention to dissolve the contract).

If the wording of this clause is general (as is often the case), the risk is that it will be of little use; it is also advisable to check that the regulation of force majeure complies with the law applicable to the contract (here an in-depth analysis indicating the regime provided for by 42 national laws).

Applicable law and dispute resolution clauses

Suppose the customer or supplier is based abroad. In that case, several significant differences must be borne in mind: the first is the agreement’s language, which must be intelligible to the foreign party, therefore usually in English or another language familiar to the parties, possibly also in two languages with parallel text.

The second issue concerns the applicable law, which should be expressly indicated in the agreement. This subject matter is vast, and here we can say that the decision on the applicable law must be made on a case-by-case basis, intentionally: in fact, it is not always convenient to recall the application of the law of one’s own country.

In most international sales contracts, the 1980 Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”) applies, a uniform law that is balanced, clear, and easy to understand. Therefore, it is not advisable to exclude it.

Finally, in a supply framework agreement with an international supplier, it is important to identify the method of dispute resolution: no solution fits all. Choosing a country’s jurisdiction is not always the right decision (indeed, it can often prove counterproductive).

Christophe Hery

业务领域

  • 代理中介
  • 反垄断
  • 仲裁
  • 分销协议
  • 电子商务
联系方式 Christophe

写信给 Christophe





    阅读 Legalmondo 的隐私政策
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

    Distribution Contracts in Spain

    2023年8月30日

    • 西班牙
    • 分销协议

    When selling health-related products, the question frequently arises as to which product category, and therefore which regulatory regime, they fall under. This question often arises when distinguishing between food supplements and medicinal products. But in other constellations, too, difficult questions of demarcation arise, which must be answered with a view to legally compliant marketing.

    In a highly interesting case, the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) of Düsseldorf, Germany, recently had to classify a CBD-containing (Cannabidiol) mouth spray that was explicitly advertised by its manufacturer as a “cosmetic” and therefore not suitable for human consumption. The Ingredients of the product were labelled: « Cannabis sativa seed oil, cannabidiol from cannabis extract, tincture or resin, cannabis sativa leaf extract ».

    The Product is additionally also labelled as follows: “Cosmetic oral care spray with hemp leaf extract. » The Instructions for use are: « Spray a maximum of 3 sprays a day into the mouth as desired. Spit out after 30 seconds and do not swallow. »

    A spray of the Product contains 10 mg CBD. This results in a maximum daily dose of 30 mg CBD as specified by the company.

    At the same time, however, it was pointed out that the “consumption” of a spray shot was harmless to health.

    The mouth spray could therefore be consumed like a food, but was declared as a “cosmetic”. This is precisely where the court had to examine whether the prohibition order based on food law was lawful.

    For the definition of cosmetic products Article 2 sentence 4 lit. e) Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 refers to Directive 76/768/EEC. This was replaced by Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009. Cosmetic products are defined in Article 2(1)(a) as follows: “‘cosmetic product’ means any substance or mixture intended to be placed in contact with the external parts of the human body (epidermis, hair system, nails, lips and external genital organs) or with the teeth and the mucous membranes of the oral cavity with a view exclusively or mainly to cleaning them, perfuming them, changing their appearance, protecting them, keeping them in good condition or correcting body odours ”.

    Here too, it is not the composition of the product that is decisive, but its intended purpose, which is to be determined on the basis of objective criteria according to general public opinion based on concrete evidence.

    According to the system of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002, Article 2 sentence 1 first defines foodstuffs in general and then excludes cosmetic products under sentence 4 lit. e). According to the definition in Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009, cosmetic products must have an exclusive or at least predominant cosmetic purpose. It can be concluded from this system that the exclusivity or predominance must be positively established. If it is not possible to determine which purpose predominates, the product is a foodstuff.

    The Düsseldorf Administrative Court had to deal with this question in the aforementioned legal dispute brought by the distributor against an official prohibition order in the form of a so-called general ruling („Allgemeinverfügung“). By notice dated July 11, 2020, the competent authority issued a general ruling prohibiting the marketing of foodstuffs containing “cannabidiol (as ‘CBD isolates’ or ‘hemp extracts enriched with CBD’)” in their urban area. The company, based in this city, offered the mouth spray described above.

    In a ruling dated 25.10.2024 (Courts Ref. : 26 K 2072/23), the court dismissed the company’s claim. The court’s main arguments were :

    1. Classification as food: the CBD spray was correctly classified as food by the authority, as it was reasonable to expect that it could be swallowed despite indications to the contrary. According to an objective perception of the market, there is a now established expectation of an average informed, attentive and reasonable consumer to the effect that CBD oils are intended as “lifestyle” products for oral ingestion, from which consumers hope for positive health effects The labelling as “cosmetic” was refuted by the objective consumer expectations and the nature of the application.
    2. No medicinal product status: Due to the low dosage in this case (max. 30 mg CBD per day), the product was not classified as a functional medicinal product, as there was no sufficiently proven pharmacological effect.
    3. Legal basis of the injunction: The prohibition of the sale of the products by the defendant was based on a general order, which was confirmed as lawful by the court.

    In the ruling, the court emphasizes the objective consumer expectation and clarifies that products cannot be exempted from a different regulatory classification by the authorities or the courts solely by their labelling.

    Conclusion: The decision presented underlines the considerable importance of the “correct” classification of a health product in the respective legal product category. In addition to the classic distinction between foodstuffs (food supplements) and medicinal products, comparable issues also arise with other product types. In this case in the constellation of cosmetics versus food – combined with the special legal component of the use of CBD.

    The author of this article is Matthias Hesshaus

    Commercial agents have specific regulations with rights and obligations that are “mandatory”: those who sign an agency contract cannot derogate from them. Answering whether an influencer can be an agent is essential because, if he or she is an agent, the agent regulations will apply to him or her.

    Let’s take it one step at a time. The influencer we will talk about is the person who, with their actions and comments (blogs, social media accounts, videos, events, or a bit of everything), talks to their followers about the advantages of certain products or services identified with a certain third-party brand. In exchange for this, the influencer is paid.[1]

    A commercial agent is someone who promotes the contracting of others’ products or services, does so in a stable way, and gets paid in return. He or she can also conclude the contract, but this is not essential.

    The law imposes certain obligations and guarantees rights to those signing an agency contract. If the influencer is considered an “agent”, he or she should also have them. And there are several of them: for example, the duration, the notice to be given to terminate the contract, the obligations of the parties… And the most relevant, the right of the agent to receive compensation at the end of the relationship for the clientele that has been generated. If an influencer is an agent, he would also have this right.

    How can an influencer be assessed as an agent? For that we must analyse two things: (a) the contract (and be careful because there is a contract, even if it is not written) and (b) how the parties have behaved.

    The elements that, in my opinion, are most relevant to conclude that an influencer is an agent would be the following:

     

    a) the influencer promotes the contracting of services or the purchase of products and does so independently.

    The contract will indicate what the influencer must do. It will be clearer to consider him as an agent if his comments encourage contracting: for example, if they include a link to the manufacturer’s website, if he offers a discount code, if he allows orders to be placed with him. And if he does so as an independent “professional”, and not as an employee (with a timetable, means, instructions).

    It may be more difficult to consider him as an agent if he limits himself to talking about the benefits of the product or service, appearing in advertising as a brand image, and using a certain product, and speaking well of it. The important thing, in my opinion, is to examine whether the influencer’s activity is aimed at getting people to buy the product he or she is talking about, or whether what he or she is doing is more generic persuasion (appearing in advertising, lending his or her image to a product, carrying out demonstrations of its use), or even whether he or she is only seeking to promote himself or herself as a vehicle for general information (for example, influencers who make comparisons of products without trying to get people to buy one or the other). In the first case (trying to get people to buy the product) it would be easier to consider it as an “agent”, and less so in the other examples.

     

    b) this “promotion” is done in a continuous or stable manner.

    Be careful because this continuity or stability does not mean that the contract has to be of indefinite duration. Rather, it is the opposite of a sporadic relationship. A one-year contract may be sufficient, while several unconnected interventions, even if they last longer, may not be sufficient.

    In this case, influencers who make occasional comments, who intervene with isolated actions, who limit themselves to making comparisons without promoting the purchase of one or the other, and even if all this leads to sales, even if their comments are frequent and even if they can have a great influence on the behavior of their followers, would be excluded as agents.

     

    c) they receive remuneration for their activity.

    An influencer who is remunerated based on sales (e.g., by promoting a discount code, a specific link, or referring to your website for orders) can more easily be considered as an agent. But also, if he or she only receives a fixed amount for their promotion. On the other hand, influencers who do not receive any remuneration from the brand (e.g. someone who talks about the benefits of a product in comparison with others, but without linking it to its promotion) would be excluded.

     

    Conclusion

    The borderline between what qualifies an influencer as an agent and what does not can be very thin, especially because contracts are often not unambiguous and sometimes their services are multiple. The most important thing is to carefully analyse the contract and the parties’ behaviour.

    An influencer could be considered a commercial agent to the extent that his or her activity promotes the contracting of the product (not simply if he or she carries out informative or image work), that it is done on a stable basis (and not merely anecdotal or sporadic) and in exchange for remuneration.

    To assess the specific situation, it is essential to analyse the contract (if it is written, this is easier) and the parties’ behaviour.

    In short, to draw up a contract with an influencer or, if it has already been signed, but you want to conclude it, you will have to pay attention to these elements. As an influencer you may have a strong interest in being considered an agent at the end of the contract and thus be entitled to compensation, while as employer you will prefer the opposite.

    FINAL NOTE. In Spain and at the date of this comment (9 June 2024) I am not aware of any judgement dealing with this issue. My proposal is based on my experience of more than 30 years advising and litigating on agency contracts. On the other hand, and as far as I know, there is at least one judgment in Rome (Italy) dealing with the matter: Tribunale di Roma; Sezione Lavoro 4º, St. 2615 of 4 March 2024; R. G. n. 38445/2022.

    The commercial agent has the right to obtain certain information about the sales of the principal. The Spanish Law on Agency Contracts provides (15.2 LCA) that the agent has the right to demand to see the accounts of the principal in order to verify all matters relating to the commissions due to him. And also, to be provided with the information available to the principal and necessary to verify the amount of such commissions.

    This article is in line with the 1986 Commercial Agents Directive, according to which (12.3) the agent is entitled to demand to be provided with all information at the disposal of the principal, particularly an extract from the books of account, which is necessary to verify the amount of commission due to the agent. This may not be altered to the detriment of the commercial agent by agreement.

    The question is, does this right remain even after the termination of the agency contract? In other words: once the agency contract is terminated, can the agent request the information and documentation mentioned in these articles and is the Principal obliged to provide it?

    In our opinion, the rule does not say anything that limits this right, rather the opposite is to be expected. Therefore, to the extent that there is still any possible commission that may arise from such verification, the answer must be yes. Let us see.

    The right to demand the production of accounts exists so that the agent can verify the amount of commissions. And the agent is entitled to commissions for acts and operations concluded during the term of the contract (art. 12 LCA), but also for acts or operations concluded after the termination of the contract (art. 13 LCA), and for operations not carried out due to circumstances attributable to the principal (art. 17 LCA). In addition, the agent is entitled to have the commission accrued at the time when the act or transaction should have been executed (art. 14 LCA).

    All these transactions can take place after the conclusion of the contract. Consider the usual situation where orders are placed during the contract but are accepted or executed afterwards. To reduce the agent’s right to be informed only during the term of the contract would be to limit his entitlement to the corresponding commission unduly. And it should be borne in mind that the amount of the commissions during the last five years may also influence the calculation of the client (goodwill) indemnity (art. 28 LCA), so that the agent’s interest in knowing them is twofold: what he would receive as commission, and what could increase the basis for future indemnity.

    This has been confirmed, for example, by the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) of Madrid (AAP 227/2017, of 29 June [ECLI:ES:APM:2017:2873A]) which textually states:

    […] art. 15.2 of the Agency Contract Act provides for the right of the agent to demand the exhibition of the Principal’s accounts in the particulars necessary to verify everything relating to the commissions corresponding to him, as well as to be provided with the information available to the Principal and necessary to verify the amount. This does not prevent, […], the agency contract having already been terminated, as this does not imply that commissions would cease to accrue for policies, contracted with the mediation of the agent, which remain in force.

    The question then arises as to whether this right to information is unlimited in time. And here the answer would be in the negative. The limitation of the right to receive information would be linked to the statute of limitations of the right to claim the corresponding commission. If the right to receive the commission were undoubtedly time-barred, it could be argued that it would not be possible to receive information about it. But for such an exception, the statute of limitations must be clear, therefore, taking into account possible interruptions due to claims, even extrajudicial ones. In case of doubt, it will be necessary to recognise the right to demand the information, without prejudice to later invoking and recognising the impossibility of claiming the commission if the right is time-barred. And for this we must consider the limitation period for claiming commissions (in general, three years) and that of the right to claim compensation for clientele (one year).

    In short: it does not seem that the right to receive information and to examine the principal’s documentation is limited by the term of the agency contract; although, on the other hand, it would be appropriate to analyse the possible limitation period for claiming commissions. In the absence of a clear answer to this question, the right to information should, in our opinion, prevail, without prejudice to the fact that the result may not entitle the claim because it is time-barred.

    SUMMARY: In large-scale events such as the Paris Olympics certain companies will attempt to “wildly” associate their brand with the event through a practice called “ambush marketing”, defined by caselaw as “an advertising strategy implemented by a company in order to associate its commercial image with that of an event, and thus to benefit from the media impact of said event, without paying the related rights and without first obtaining the event organizer’s authorization” (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912). A risky and punishable practice, that might sometimes yet be an option yet.

    Key takeaways

    • Ambush marketing might be a punished practice but is not prohibited as such;
    • As a counterpart of their investment, sponsors and official partners benefit from an extensive legal protection against all forms of ambush marketing in the event concerned, through various general texts (counterfeiting, parasitism, intellectual property) or more specific ones (e.g. sport law);
    • The Olympics Games are subject to specific regulations that further strengthen this protection, particularly in terms of intellectual property.
    • But these rights are not absolute, and they are still thin opportunities for astute ambush marketing.

    The protection offered to sponsors and official partners of sporting and cultural events from ambush marketing

    With a budget of over 4 billion euros, the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games are financed mostly by various official partners and sponsors, who in return benefit from a right to use Olympic and Paralympic properties to be able to associate their own brand image and distinctive signs with these events.

    Ambush marketing is not punishable as such under French law, but several scattered texts provide extensive protection against ambush marketing for sponsors and partners of sporting or cultural continental-wide or world-wide events. Indeed, sponsors are legitimately entitled to peacefully enjoy the rights offered to them in return for large-scale investments in events such as the FIFA or rugby World Cups, or the Olympic Games.

    In particular, official sponsors and organizers of such events may invoke:

    • the “classic” protections offered by intellectual property law (trademark law and copyright) in the context of infringement actions based on the French Intellectual Property Code,
    • tort law (parasitism and unfair competition based on article 1240 of the French Civil Code);
    • consumer law (misleading commercial practices) based on the French Consumer Code,
    • but also more specific texts such as the protection of the exploitation rights of sports federations and sports event organizers derived from the events or competitions they organize, as set out in article L.333-1 of the French Sports Code, which gives sports event organizers an exploitation monopoly.

    The following ambush marketing practices were sanctioned on the abovementioned grounds:

    • The use of a tennis competition name and of the trademark associated with it during the sporting event: The organization of online bets, by an online betting operator, on the Roland Garros tournament, using the protected sign and trademark Roland Garros to target the matches on which the bets were organized. The unlawful exploitation of the sporting event, was punished and 400 K€ were allowed as damages, based on article L. 333-1 of the French Sports Code, since only the French Tennis Federation (F.F.T.) owns the right to exploit Roland Garros. The use of the trademark was also punished as counterfeiting (with 300 K€ damages) and parasitism (with 500 K€ damages) (Paris Court of Appeal, Oct. 14, 2009, Case No 08/19179);
    • An advertising campaign taking place during a film festival and reproducing the event’s trademark: The organization, during the Cannes Film Festival, of a digital advertising campaign by a cosmetics brand through the publication on its social networks of videos showing the beauty makeovers of the brand’s muses, in some of which the official poster of the Cannes Film Festival was visible, one of which reproduced the registered trademark of the “Palme d’Or”, was punished on the grounds of copyright infringement and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Judicial Court, Dec. 11, 2020, Case No19/08543);
    • An advertising campaign aimed at falsely claiming to be an official partner of an event: The use, during the Cannes Film Festival, of the slogan “official hairdresser for women” together with the expressions “Cannes” and “Cannes Festival”, and other publications falsely leading the public to believe that the hairdresser was an official partner, to the detriment of the only official hairdresser of the Cannes festival, was punished on the grounds of unfair competition and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912).

    These financial penalties may be combined with injunctions to cease these behaviors, and/or publication in the press under penalty.

    An even greater protection for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games

    The Paris 2024 Olympic Games are also subject to specific regulations.

    Firstly, Article L.141-5 of the French Sports Code, enacted for the benefit of the “Comité national olympique et sportif français” (CNOSF) and the “Comité de l’organisation des Jeux Olympiques et Paralympiques de Paris 2024” (COJOP), protects Olympic signs such as the national Olympic emblems, but also the emblems, the flag, motto and Olympic symbol, Olympic anthem, logo, mascot, slogan and posters of the Olympic Games, the year of the Olympic Games “city + year”, the terms “Jeux Olympiques”, “Olympisme”, “Olympiade”, “JO”, “olympique”, “olympien” and “olympienne”. Under no circumstances may these signs be reproduced or even imitated by third-party companies. The COJOP has also published a guide to the protection of the Olympic trademark, outlining the protected symbols, trademarks and signs, as well as the protection of the official partners of the Olympic Games.

    Secondly, Law no. 2018-202 of March 26, 2018 on the organization of the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games adds even more specific prohibitions, such as the reservation for official sponsors of advertising space located near Olympic venues, or located on the Olympic and Paralympic torch route. This protection is unique in the context of the Olympic Games, but usually unregulated in the context of simple sporting events.

    The following practices, for example, have already been sanctioned on the above-mentioned grounds:

    • Reproduction of a logo imitating the well-known “Olympic” trademark on a clothing collection: The marketing of a collection of clothing, during the 2016 Olympic Games, bearing a logo (five hearts in the colors of the 5 Olympic colors intersecting in the image of the Olympic logo) imitating the Olympic symbol in association with the words “RIO” and “RIO 2016”, was punished on the grounds of parasitism (10 K€ damages) and articles L. 141-5 of the French Sports Code (35 K€) and L. 713-1 of the French Intellectual Property Code (10 K€ damages) (Paris Judicial Court, June 7, 2018, Case No16/10605);
    • The organization of a contest on social networks using protected symbols: During the 2018 Olympic Games in PyeongChang, a car rental company organized an online game inviting Internet users to nominate the athletes they wanted to win a clock radio, associated with the hashtags “#JO2018” (“#OJ2018”), “#Jeuxolympiques” (“#Olympicsgame”) or “C’est parti pour les jeux Olympiques” (“let’s go for the Olympic Games”) without authorization from the CNOSF, owner of these distinctive signs under the 2018 law and article L.141-5 of the French Sport Code and punished on these grounds with 20 K€ damages and of 10 K€ damages for parasitism (Paris Judicial Court, May 29, 2020, n°18/14115).

    These regulations offer official partners greater protection for their investments against ambush marketing practices from non-official sponsors.

    Some marketing operations might be exempted

    An analysis of case law and promotional practices nonetheless reveals the contours of certain advertising practices that could be authorized (i.e. not sanctioned by the above-mentioned texts), provided they are skillfully prepared and presented. Here are a few exemples :

    • Communication of information for advertising purposes: The use of the results of a rugby match and the announcement of a forthcoming match in a newspaper to promote a motor vehicle and its distinctive features was deemed lawful: “France 13 Angleterre 24 – the Fiat 500 congratulates England on its victory and looks forward to seeing the French team on March 9 for France-Italy” (France 13 Angleterre 24 – la Fiat 500 félicite l’Angleterre pour sa victoire et donne rendez-vous à l’équipe de France le 9 mars pour France-Italie) the judges having considered that this publication “merely reproduces a current sporting result, acquired and made public on the front page of the sports newspaper, and refers to a future match also known as already announced by the newspaper in a news article” (Court of cassation, May 20, 2014, Case No 13-12.102).
    • Sponsorship of athletes, including those taking part in Olympic competitions: Subject to compliance with the applicable regulatory framework, particularly as regards models, any company may enter into partnerships with athletes taking part in the Olympic Games, for example by donating clothing bearing the desired logo or brand, which they could wear during their participation in the various events. Athletes may also, under certain conditions, broadcast acknowledgements from their partner (even if unofficial). Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter governs the use of athletes’, coaches’ and officials’ images for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.

    The combined legal and marketing approach to the conception and preparation of the message of such a communication operation is essential to avoid legal proceedings, particularly on the grounds of parasitism; one might therefore legitimately contemplate advertising campaigns, particularly clever, or even malicious ones.

    In this first episode of Legalmondo’s Distribution Talks series, I spoke with Ignacio Alonso, a Madrid-based lawyer with extensive experience in international commercial distribution.

    Main discussion points:

    • in Spain, there is no specific law for distribution agreements, which are governed by the general rules of the Commercial Code;
    • therefore, it is essential to draft a clear and comprehensive contract, which will be the primary source of the parties’ rights and obligations;
    • it is also good to be aware of Spanish case law on commercial distribution, which in some cases applies the law on commercial agency by analogy.
    • the most common issues involving foreign producers distributing in Spain arise at the time of termination of the relationship, mainly because case law grants the terminated distributor an indemnity of clientele or goodwill if similar prerequisites to those in the agency regulations apply.
    • another frequent dispute concerns the adequacy of the notice period for terminating the contract, especially if there is no agreement between the parties: the advice is to follow what the agency regulations stipulate and thus establish a minimum notice period of one month for each year of the contract’s duration, up to 6 months for agreements lasting more than five years;
    • regarding dispute resolution tools, mediation is an option that should be carefully considered because it is quick, inexpensive, and allows a shared solution to be sought flexibly without disrupting the business relationship.
    • if mediation fails, the parties can provide for recourse to arbitration or state court. The choice depends on the case’s specific circumstances, and one factor in favor of jurisdiction is the possibility of appeal, which is excluded in the case of arbitration.

    Go deeper

    Summary

    On 1 June 2022, Regulation EU n. 720/2022, i.e.: the new Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (hereinafter: “VBER”), replaced the previous version (Regulation EU n. 330/2010), expired on 31 May 2022.

    The new VBER and the new vertical guidelines (hereinafter: “Guidelines”) have received the main evidence gathered during the lifetime of the previous VBER and contain some relevant provisions affecting the discipline of all B2B agreements among businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain.

    In this article, we will focus on the impact of the new VBER on sales through digital platforms, listing the main novelties impacting distribution chains, including a platform for marketing products/services.

    The general discipline of vertical agreements

    Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibits all agreements that prevent, restrict, or distort competition within the EU market, listing the main types, e.g.: price fixing; market partitioning; limitations on production/development/investment; unfair terms, etc.

    However, Article 101(3) TFEU exempts from such restrictions the agreements that contribute to improving the EU market, to be identified in a special category Regulation.

    The VBER establishes the category of vertical agreements (i.e., agreements between businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain), determining which of these agreements are exempted from Article 101(1) TFEU prohibition.

    In short, vertical agreements are presumed to be exempted (and therefore valid) if they do not contain so-called “hardcore restrictions” (i.e., severe restrictions of competition, such as an absolute ban on sales in a territory or the manufacturer’s determination of the distributor’s resale price) and if neither party’s market share exceeds 30%.

    The exempted agreements benefit from what has been termed the “safe harbour” of the VBER. In contrast, the others will be subject to the general prohibition of Article 101(1) TFEU unless they can benefit from an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

    The innovations introduced by the new VBER to online platforms

    The first relevant aspect concerns the classification of the platforms, as the European Commission excluded that the online platform generally meets the conditions to be categorized as agency agreements.

    While there have never been doubts concerning platforms that operate by purchasing and reselling products (classic example: Amazon Retail), some have arisen concerning those platforms that merely promote the products of third parties without carrying out the activity of resale (classic example: Amazon Marketplace).

    With this statement, the European Commission wanted to clear the field of doubt, making explicit that intermediation service providers (such as online platforms) qualify as suppliers (as opposed to commercial agents) under the VBER. This reflects the approach of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 (“P2B Regulation”), which has, for the first time, dictated a specific discipline for digital platforms. It provided for a set of rules to create a “fair, transparent, and predictable environment” for smaller businesses and customers” and for the rationale of the Digital Markets Act, banning certain practices used by large platforms acting as “gatekeepers”.

    Therefore, all contracts concluded between manufacturers and platforms (defined as ‘providers of online intermediation services’) are subject to all the restrictions imposed by the VBER. These include the price, the territories to which or the customers to whom the intermediated goods or services may be sold, or the restrictions relating to online advertising and selling.

    Thus, to give an example, the operator of a platform may not impose a fixed or minimum sale price for a transaction promoted through the platform.

    The second most impactful aspect concerns hybrid platforms, i.e., competing in the relevant market to sell intermediated goods or services. Amazon is the most well-known example, as it is a provider of intermediation services (“Amazon Marketplace”), and – at the same time – it distributes the products of those parties (“Amazon Retail”). We have previously explored the distinction between those 2 business models (and the consequences in terms of intellectual property infringement) here.

    The new VBER explicitly does not apply to hybrid platforms. Therefore, the agreements concluded among such platforms and manufacturers are subject to the limitations of the TFEU, as such providers may have the incentive to favour their sales and the ability to influence the outcome of competition between undertakings that use their online intermediation services.

    Those agreements must be assessed individually under Article 101 of the TFEU, as they do not necessarily restrict competition within the meaning of TFEU, or they may fulfil the conditions of an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

    The third very relevant aspect concerns the parity obligations (also referred to as Most Favoured Nation Clauses, or MFNs), i.e., the contract provisions in which a seller (directly or indirectly) agrees to give the buyer the best terms it makes available to any other buyer.

    Indeed, platforms’ contractual terms often contain parity obligation clauses to prevent users from offering their products/services at lower prices or on better conditions on their websites or other platforms.

    The new VBER deals explicitly with parity clauses, making a distinction between clauses whose purpose is to prohibit users of a platform from selling goods or services on more favourable terms through competing platforms (so-called “wide parity clauses”), and clauses that prohibit sales on more favourable terms only in respect of channels operated directly by the users (so-called “narrow parity clauses”).

    Wide parity clauses do not benefit from the VBER exemption; therefore, such obligations must be assessed individually under Article 101(3) TFEU.

    On the other hand, narrow parity clauses continue to benefit from the exemption already granted by the old VBER if they do not exceed the threshold of 30% of the relevant market share set out in Article 3 of the new VBER. However, the new Guidelines warn against using overly narrow parity obligations by online platforms covering a significant share of users, stating that if there is no evidence of pro-competitive effects, the benefit of the block exemption is likely to be withdrawn.

    Impact and takeaways

    The new VBER entered into force on 1 June 2022 and is already applicable to agreements signed after that date. Agreements already in force on 31 May 2022 that satisfy the conditions for exemption under the current VBER but do not satisfy the requirements under the new VBER shall benefit from a one-year transitional period.

    The new regime will be the playing field for all platform-driven sales over the next 12 years (the regulation expires on 31 May 2034). Currently, the rather restrictive novelties on hybrid platforms and parity obligations will likely necessitate substantial revisions to existing trade agreements.

    Here, then, are some tips for managing contracts and relationships with online platforms:

    • the new VBER is the right opportunity to review the existing distribution networks. The revision will have to consider not only the new regulatory limits (e.g., the ban on wide parity clauses) but also the new discipline reserved for hybrid platforms and dual distribution to coordinate the different distribution channels as efficiently as possible, by the stakes set by the new VBER and the Guidelines;
    • platforms are likely to play an even greater role during the next decade; it is, therefore, essential to consider these sales channels from the outset, coordinating them with the other existing ones (retail, direct sales, distributors, etc.) to avoid jeopardizing the marketing of products or services;
    • the European legislator’s attention toward platforms is growing. Looking up from the VBER, one should not forget that they are subject to a multitude of other European regulations, which are gradually regulating the sector and which must be considered when concluding contracts with platforms. The reference is not only to the recent Digital Market Act and P2B Regulation but also to the protection of IP rights on platforms, which – as we have already seen – is still an open issue.

    Summary

    To avoid disputes with important suppliers, it is advisable to plan purchases over the medium and long term and not operate solely on the basis of orders and order confirmations. Planning makes it possible to agree on the duration of the ‘supply agreement, minimum volumes of products to be delivered and delivery schedules, prices, and the conditions under which prices can be varied over time.
    The use of a framework purchase agreement can help avoid future uncertainties and allows various options to be used to manage commodity price fluctuations depending on the type of products , such as automatic price indexing or agreement to renegotiate in the event of commodity fluctuations beyond a certain set tolerance period.

    I read in a press release: “These days, the glass industry is sending wine companies new unilateral contract amendments with price changes of 20%…”

    What can one do to avoid the imposition of price increases by suppliers? 

    • Know your rights and act in an informed manner
    • Plan and organise your supply chain

    Does my supplier have the right to increase prices?

    If contracts have already been concluded, e.g., orders have already been confirmed by the supplier, the answer is often no.

    It is not legitimate to request a price change. It is much less legitimate to communicate it unilaterally, with the threat of cancelling the order or not delivering the goods if the request is not granted.

    What if he tells me it is force majeure?

    That’s wrong: increased costs are not a force majeure but rather an unforeseen excessive onerousness, which hardly happens.

    What if the supplier canceled the order, unilaterally increased the price, or did not deliver the goods?

    He would be in breach of contract and liable to pay damages for violating his contractual obligations.

    How can one avoid a tug-of-war with suppliers?

    The tools are there. You have to know them and use them.

    It is necessary to plan purchases in the medium term, agreeing with suppliers on a schedule in which are set out:

    • the quantities of products to be ordered
    • the delivery terms
    • the durationof the agreement
    • the pricesof the products or raw materials
    • the conditions under which prices can be varied

    There is a very effective instrument to do so: a framework purchase agreement.

    Using a framework purchase agreement, the parties negotiate the above elements, which will be valid for the agreed period.

    Once the agreement is concluded, product orders will follow, governed by the framework agreement, without the need to renegotiate the content of individual deliveries each time.

    For an in-depth discussion of this contract, see this article.

    • “Yes, but my suppliers will never sign it!”

    Why not? Ask them to explain the reason.

    This type of agreement is in the interest of both parties. It allows planning future orders and grants certainty as to whether, when, and how much the parties can change the price.

    In contrast, acting without written agreements forces the parties to operate in an environment of uncertainty. Suppliers can request price increases from one day to the next and refuse supply if the changes are not accepted.

    How are price changes for future supplies regulated?

    Depending on the type of products or services and the raw materials or energy relevant in determining the final price, there are several possibilities.

    • The first option is to index the price automatically. E.g., if the cost of a barrel of Brent oil increases/decreases by 10%, the party concerned is entitled to request a corresponding adjustment of the product’s price in all orders placed as of the following week.
    • An alternative is to provide for a price renegotiation in the event of a fluctuation of the reference commodity. E.g., suppose the LME Aluminium index of the London Stock Exchange increases above a certain threshold. In that case, the interested party may request a price renegotiationfor orders in the period following the increase.

    What if the parties do not agree on new prices?

    It is possible to terminate the contract or refer the price determination to a third party, who would act as arbitrator and set the new prices for future orders.

    Summary

    The framework supply contract is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier) that take place over a certain period of time. This agreement determines the main elements of future contracts such as price, product volumes, delivery terms, technical or quality specifications, and the duration of the agreement.

    The framework contract is useful for ensuring continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a certain product that is essential for planning industrial or commercial activity. While the general terms and conditions of purchase or sale are the rules that apply to all suppliers or customers of the company. The framework contract is advisable to be concluded with essential suppliers for the continuity of business activity, in general or in relation to a particular project.

    What I am talking about in this article:

    • What is the supply framework agreement?
    • What is the function of the supply framework agreement?
    • The difference with the general conditions of sale or purchase
    • When to enter a purchase framework agreement?
    • When is it beneficial to conclude a sales framework agreement?
    • The content of the supply framework agreement
    • Price revision clause and hardship
    • Delivery terms in the supply framework agreement
    • The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts
    • International sales: applicable law and dispute resolution arrangements

    What is a framework supply agreement?

    It is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier), which will take place over a certain period.

    It is therefore referred to as a “framework agreement” because it is an agreement that establishes the rules of a future series of sales and purchase contracts, determining their primary elements (such as the price, the volumes of products to be sold and purchased, the delivery terms of the products, and the duration of the contract).

    After concluding the framework agreement, the parties will exchange orders and order confirmations, entering a series of autonomous sales contracts without re-discussing the covenants already defined in the framework agreement.

    Depending on one’s point of view, this agreement is also called a sales framework agreement (if the seller/supplier uses it) or a purchasing framework agreement (if the customer proposes it).

    What is the function of the framework supply agreement?

    It is helpful to arrange a framework agreement in all cases where the parties intend to proceed with a series of purchases/sales of products over time and are interested in giving stability to the commercial agreement by determining its main elements.

    In particular, the purchase framework agreement may be helpful to a company that wishes to ensure continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a specific product that is essential for planning its industrial or commercial activity (raw material, semi-finished product, component).

    By concluding the framework agreement, the company can obtain, for example, a commitment from the supplier to supply a particular minimum volume of products, at a specific price, with agreed terms and technical specifications, for a certain period.

    This agreement is also beneficial, at the same time, to the seller/supplier, which can plan sales for that period and organize, in turn, the supply chain that enables it to procure the raw materials and components necessary to produce the products.

    What is the difference between a purchase or sales framework agreement and the general terms and conditions?

    Whereas the framework agreement is an agreement that is used with one or more suppliers for a specific product and a certain time frame, determining the essential elements of future contracts, the general purchase (or sales) conditions are the rules that apply to all the company’s suppliers (or customers).

    The first agreement, therefore, is negotiated and defined on a case-by-case basis. At the same time, the general conditions are prepared unilaterally by the company, and the customers or suppliers (depending on whether they are sales or purchase conditions) adhere to and accept that the general conditions apply to the individual order and/or future contracts.

    The two agreements might also co-exist: in that case; it is a good idea to specify which contract should prevail in the event of a discrepancy between the different provisions (usually, this hierarchy is envisaged, ranging from the special to the general: order – order confirmation; framework agreement; general terms and conditions of purchase).

    When is it important to conclude a purchase framework agreement?

    It is beneficial to conclude this agreement when dealing with a mono-supplier or a supplier that would be very difficult to replace if it stopped selling products to the purchasing company.

    The risks one aims to avoid or diminish are so-called stock-outs, i.e., supply interruptions due to the supplier’s lack of availability of products or because the products are available, but the parties cannot agree on the delivery time or sales price.

    Another result that can be achieved is to bind a strategic supplier for a certain period by agreeing that it will reserve an agreed share of production for the buyer on predetermined terms and conditions and avoid competition with offers from third parties interested in the products for the duration of the agreement.

    When is it helpful to conclude a sales framework agreement?

    This agreement allows the seller/supplier to plan sales to a particular customer and thus to plan and organize its production and logistical capacity for the agreed period, avoiding extra costs or delays.

    Planning sales also makes it possible to correctly manage financial obligations and cash flows with a medium-term vision, harmonizing commitments and investments with the sales to one’s customers.

    What is the content of the supply framework agreement?

    There is no standard model of this agreement, which originated from business practice to meet the requirements indicated above.

    Generally, the agreement provides for a fixed period (e.g., 12 months) in which the parties undertake to conclude a series of purchases and sales of products, determining the price and terms of supply and the main covenants of future sales contracts.

    The most important clauses are:

    • the identification of products and technical specifications (often identified in an annex)
    • the minimum/maximum volume of supplies
    • the possible obligation to purchase/sell a minimum/maximum volume of products
    • the schedule of supplies
    • the delivery times
    • the determination of the price and the conditions for its possible modification (see also the next paragraph)
    • impediments to performance (Force Majeure)
    • cases of Hardship
    • penalties for delay or non-performance or for failure to achieve the agreed volumes
    • the hierarchy between the framework agreement and the orders and any other contracts between the parties
    • applicable law and dispute resolution (especially in international agreements)

    How to handle price revision in a supply contract?

    A crucial clause, especially in times of strong fluctuations in the prices of raw materials, transport, and energy, is the price revision clause.

    In the absence of an agreement on this issue, the parties bear the risk of a price increase by undertaking to respect the conditions initially agreed upon; except in exceptional cases (where the fluctuation is strong, affects a short period, and is caused by unforeseeable events), it isn’t straightforward to invoke the supervening excessive onerousness, which allows renegotiating the price, or the contract to be terminated.

    To avoid the uncertainty generated by price fluctuations, it is advisable to agree in the contract on the mechanisms for revising the price (e.g., automatic indexing following the quotation of raw materials). The so-called Hardship or Excessive Onerousness clause establishes what price fluctuation limits are accepted by the parties and what happens if the variations go beyond these limits, providing for the obligation to renegotiate the price or the termination of the contract if no agreement is reached within a certain period.

    How to manage delivery terms in a supply agreement?

    Another fundamental pact in a medium to long-term supply relationship concerns delivery terms. In this case, it is necessary to reconcile the purchaser’s interest in respecting the agreed dates with the supplier’s interest in avoiding claims for damages in the event of a delay, especially in the case of sales requiring intercontinental transport.

    The first thing to be clarified in this regard concerns the nature of delivery deadlines: are they essential or indicative? In the first case, the party affected has the right to terminate (i.e., wind up) the agreement in the event of non-compliance with the term; in the second case, due diligence, information, and timely notification of delays may be required, whereas termination is not a remedy that may be automatically invoked in the event of a delay.

    A useful instrument in this regard is the penalty clause: with this covenant, it is established that for each day/week/month of delay, a sum of money is due by way of damages in favor of the party harmed by the delay.

    If quantified correctly and not excessively, the penalty is helpful for both parties because it makes it possible to predict the damages that may be claimed for the delay, quantifying them in a fair and determined sum. Consequently, the seller is not exposed to claims for damages related to factors beyond his control. At the same time, the buyer can easily calculate the compensation for the delay without the need for further proof.

    The same mechanism, among other things, may be adopted to govern the buyer’s delay in accepting delivery of the goods.

    Finally, it is a good idea to specify the limit of the penalty (e.g.,10 percent of the price of the goods) and a maximum period of grace for the delay, beyond which the party concerned is entitled to terminate the contract by retaining the penalty.

    The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts

    A situation that is often confused with excessive onerousness, but is, in fact, quite different, is that of Force Majeure, i.e., the supervening impossibility of performance of the contractual obligation due to any event beyond the reasonable control of the party affected, which could not have been reasonably foreseen and the effects of which cannot be overcome by reasonable efforts.

    The function of this clause is to set forth clearly when the parties consider that Force Majeure may be invoked, what specific events are included (e.g., a lock-down of the production plant by order of the authority), and what are the consequences for the parties’ obligations (e.g., suspension of the obligation for a certain period, as long as the cause of impossibility of performance lasts, after which the party affected by performance may declare its intention to dissolve the contract).

    If the wording of this clause is general (as is often the case), the risk is that it will be of little use; it is also advisable to check that the regulation of force majeure complies with the law applicable to the contract (here an in-depth analysis indicating the regime provided for by 42 national laws).

    Applicable law and dispute resolution clauses

    Suppose the customer or supplier is based abroad. In that case, several significant differences must be borne in mind: the first is the agreement’s language, which must be intelligible to the foreign party, therefore usually in English or another language familiar to the parties, possibly also in two languages with parallel text.

    The second issue concerns the applicable law, which should be expressly indicated in the agreement. This subject matter is vast, and here we can say that the decision on the applicable law must be made on a case-by-case basis, intentionally: in fact, it is not always convenient to recall the application of the law of one’s own country.

    In most international sales contracts, the 1980 Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”) applies, a uniform law that is balanced, clear, and easy to understand. Therefore, it is not advisable to exclude it.

    Finally, in a supply framework agreement with an international supplier, it is important to identify the method of dispute resolution: no solution fits all. Choosing a country’s jurisdiction is not always the right decision (indeed, it can often prove counterproductive).

    Roberto Luzi Crivellini

    业务领域

    • 仲裁
    • 分销协议
    • 国际贸易
    • 诉讼
    • 房地产
    联系方式 Roberto

    写信给 Roberto





      阅读 Legalmondo 的隐私政策
      This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

      Distribution through digital platforms | Main novelties

      2023年3月29日

      • 欧洲
      • 分销协议

      When selling health-related products, the question frequently arises as to which product category, and therefore which regulatory regime, they fall under. This question often arises when distinguishing between food supplements and medicinal products. But in other constellations, too, difficult questions of demarcation arise, which must be answered with a view to legally compliant marketing.

      In a highly interesting case, the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) of Düsseldorf, Germany, recently had to classify a CBD-containing (Cannabidiol) mouth spray that was explicitly advertised by its manufacturer as a “cosmetic” and therefore not suitable for human consumption. The Ingredients of the product were labelled: « Cannabis sativa seed oil, cannabidiol from cannabis extract, tincture or resin, cannabis sativa leaf extract ».

      The Product is additionally also labelled as follows: “Cosmetic oral care spray with hemp leaf extract. » The Instructions for use are: « Spray a maximum of 3 sprays a day into the mouth as desired. Spit out after 30 seconds and do not swallow. »

      A spray of the Product contains 10 mg CBD. This results in a maximum daily dose of 30 mg CBD as specified by the company.

      At the same time, however, it was pointed out that the “consumption” of a spray shot was harmless to health.

      The mouth spray could therefore be consumed like a food, but was declared as a “cosmetic”. This is precisely where the court had to examine whether the prohibition order based on food law was lawful.

      For the definition of cosmetic products Article 2 sentence 4 lit. e) Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 refers to Directive 76/768/EEC. This was replaced by Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009. Cosmetic products are defined in Article 2(1)(a) as follows: “‘cosmetic product’ means any substance or mixture intended to be placed in contact with the external parts of the human body (epidermis, hair system, nails, lips and external genital organs) or with the teeth and the mucous membranes of the oral cavity with a view exclusively or mainly to cleaning them, perfuming them, changing their appearance, protecting them, keeping them in good condition or correcting body odours ”.

      Here too, it is not the composition of the product that is decisive, but its intended purpose, which is to be determined on the basis of objective criteria according to general public opinion based on concrete evidence.

      According to the system of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002, Article 2 sentence 1 first defines foodstuffs in general and then excludes cosmetic products under sentence 4 lit. e). According to the definition in Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009, cosmetic products must have an exclusive or at least predominant cosmetic purpose. It can be concluded from this system that the exclusivity or predominance must be positively established. If it is not possible to determine which purpose predominates, the product is a foodstuff.

      The Düsseldorf Administrative Court had to deal with this question in the aforementioned legal dispute brought by the distributor against an official prohibition order in the form of a so-called general ruling („Allgemeinverfügung“). By notice dated July 11, 2020, the competent authority issued a general ruling prohibiting the marketing of foodstuffs containing “cannabidiol (as ‘CBD isolates’ or ‘hemp extracts enriched with CBD’)” in their urban area. The company, based in this city, offered the mouth spray described above.

      In a ruling dated 25.10.2024 (Courts Ref. : 26 K 2072/23), the court dismissed the company’s claim. The court’s main arguments were :

      1. Classification as food: the CBD spray was correctly classified as food by the authority, as it was reasonable to expect that it could be swallowed despite indications to the contrary. According to an objective perception of the market, there is a now established expectation of an average informed, attentive and reasonable consumer to the effect that CBD oils are intended as “lifestyle” products for oral ingestion, from which consumers hope for positive health effects The labelling as “cosmetic” was refuted by the objective consumer expectations and the nature of the application.
      2. No medicinal product status: Due to the low dosage in this case (max. 30 mg CBD per day), the product was not classified as a functional medicinal product, as there was no sufficiently proven pharmacological effect.
      3. Legal basis of the injunction: The prohibition of the sale of the products by the defendant was based on a general order, which was confirmed as lawful by the court.

      In the ruling, the court emphasizes the objective consumer expectation and clarifies that products cannot be exempted from a different regulatory classification by the authorities or the courts solely by their labelling.

      Conclusion: The decision presented underlines the considerable importance of the “correct” classification of a health product in the respective legal product category. In addition to the classic distinction between foodstuffs (food supplements) and medicinal products, comparable issues also arise with other product types. In this case in the constellation of cosmetics versus food – combined with the special legal component of the use of CBD.

      The author of this article is Matthias Hesshaus

      Commercial agents have specific regulations with rights and obligations that are “mandatory”: those who sign an agency contract cannot derogate from them. Answering whether an influencer can be an agent is essential because, if he or she is an agent, the agent regulations will apply to him or her.

      Let’s take it one step at a time. The influencer we will talk about is the person who, with their actions and comments (blogs, social media accounts, videos, events, or a bit of everything), talks to their followers about the advantages of certain products or services identified with a certain third-party brand. In exchange for this, the influencer is paid.[1]

      A commercial agent is someone who promotes the contracting of others’ products or services, does so in a stable way, and gets paid in return. He or she can also conclude the contract, but this is not essential.

      The law imposes certain obligations and guarantees rights to those signing an agency contract. If the influencer is considered an “agent”, he or she should also have them. And there are several of them: for example, the duration, the notice to be given to terminate the contract, the obligations of the parties… And the most relevant, the right of the agent to receive compensation at the end of the relationship for the clientele that has been generated. If an influencer is an agent, he would also have this right.

      How can an influencer be assessed as an agent? For that we must analyse two things: (a) the contract (and be careful because there is a contract, even if it is not written) and (b) how the parties have behaved.

      The elements that, in my opinion, are most relevant to conclude that an influencer is an agent would be the following:

       

      a) the influencer promotes the contracting of services or the purchase of products and does so independently.

      The contract will indicate what the influencer must do. It will be clearer to consider him as an agent if his comments encourage contracting: for example, if they include a link to the manufacturer’s website, if he offers a discount code, if he allows orders to be placed with him. And if he does so as an independent “professional”, and not as an employee (with a timetable, means, instructions).

      It may be more difficult to consider him as an agent if he limits himself to talking about the benefits of the product or service, appearing in advertising as a brand image, and using a certain product, and speaking well of it. The important thing, in my opinion, is to examine whether the influencer’s activity is aimed at getting people to buy the product he or she is talking about, or whether what he or she is doing is more generic persuasion (appearing in advertising, lending his or her image to a product, carrying out demonstrations of its use), or even whether he or she is only seeking to promote himself or herself as a vehicle for general information (for example, influencers who make comparisons of products without trying to get people to buy one or the other). In the first case (trying to get people to buy the product) it would be easier to consider it as an “agent”, and less so in the other examples.

       

      b) this “promotion” is done in a continuous or stable manner.

      Be careful because this continuity or stability does not mean that the contract has to be of indefinite duration. Rather, it is the opposite of a sporadic relationship. A one-year contract may be sufficient, while several unconnected interventions, even if they last longer, may not be sufficient.

      In this case, influencers who make occasional comments, who intervene with isolated actions, who limit themselves to making comparisons without promoting the purchase of one or the other, and even if all this leads to sales, even if their comments are frequent and even if they can have a great influence on the behavior of their followers, would be excluded as agents.

       

      c) they receive remuneration for their activity.

      An influencer who is remunerated based on sales (e.g., by promoting a discount code, a specific link, or referring to your website for orders) can more easily be considered as an agent. But also, if he or she only receives a fixed amount for their promotion. On the other hand, influencers who do not receive any remuneration from the brand (e.g. someone who talks about the benefits of a product in comparison with others, but without linking it to its promotion) would be excluded.

       

      Conclusion

      The borderline between what qualifies an influencer as an agent and what does not can be very thin, especially because contracts are often not unambiguous and sometimes their services are multiple. The most important thing is to carefully analyse the contract and the parties’ behaviour.

      An influencer could be considered a commercial agent to the extent that his or her activity promotes the contracting of the product (not simply if he or she carries out informative or image work), that it is done on a stable basis (and not merely anecdotal or sporadic) and in exchange for remuneration.

      To assess the specific situation, it is essential to analyse the contract (if it is written, this is easier) and the parties’ behaviour.

      In short, to draw up a contract with an influencer or, if it has already been signed, but you want to conclude it, you will have to pay attention to these elements. As an influencer you may have a strong interest in being considered an agent at the end of the contract and thus be entitled to compensation, while as employer you will prefer the opposite.

      FINAL NOTE. In Spain and at the date of this comment (9 June 2024) I am not aware of any judgement dealing with this issue. My proposal is based on my experience of more than 30 years advising and litigating on agency contracts. On the other hand, and as far as I know, there is at least one judgment in Rome (Italy) dealing with the matter: Tribunale di Roma; Sezione Lavoro 4º, St. 2615 of 4 March 2024; R. G. n. 38445/2022.

      The commercial agent has the right to obtain certain information about the sales of the principal. The Spanish Law on Agency Contracts provides (15.2 LCA) that the agent has the right to demand to see the accounts of the principal in order to verify all matters relating to the commissions due to him. And also, to be provided with the information available to the principal and necessary to verify the amount of such commissions.

      This article is in line with the 1986 Commercial Agents Directive, according to which (12.3) the agent is entitled to demand to be provided with all information at the disposal of the principal, particularly an extract from the books of account, which is necessary to verify the amount of commission due to the agent. This may not be altered to the detriment of the commercial agent by agreement.

      The question is, does this right remain even after the termination of the agency contract? In other words: once the agency contract is terminated, can the agent request the information and documentation mentioned in these articles and is the Principal obliged to provide it?

      In our opinion, the rule does not say anything that limits this right, rather the opposite is to be expected. Therefore, to the extent that there is still any possible commission that may arise from such verification, the answer must be yes. Let us see.

      The right to demand the production of accounts exists so that the agent can verify the amount of commissions. And the agent is entitled to commissions for acts and operations concluded during the term of the contract (art. 12 LCA), but also for acts or operations concluded after the termination of the contract (art. 13 LCA), and for operations not carried out due to circumstances attributable to the principal (art. 17 LCA). In addition, the agent is entitled to have the commission accrued at the time when the act or transaction should have been executed (art. 14 LCA).

      All these transactions can take place after the conclusion of the contract. Consider the usual situation where orders are placed during the contract but are accepted or executed afterwards. To reduce the agent’s right to be informed only during the term of the contract would be to limit his entitlement to the corresponding commission unduly. And it should be borne in mind that the amount of the commissions during the last five years may also influence the calculation of the client (goodwill) indemnity (art. 28 LCA), so that the agent’s interest in knowing them is twofold: what he would receive as commission, and what could increase the basis for future indemnity.

      This has been confirmed, for example, by the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) of Madrid (AAP 227/2017, of 29 June [ECLI:ES:APM:2017:2873A]) which textually states:

      […] art. 15.2 of the Agency Contract Act provides for the right of the agent to demand the exhibition of the Principal’s accounts in the particulars necessary to verify everything relating to the commissions corresponding to him, as well as to be provided with the information available to the Principal and necessary to verify the amount. This does not prevent, […], the agency contract having already been terminated, as this does not imply that commissions would cease to accrue for policies, contracted with the mediation of the agent, which remain in force.

      The question then arises as to whether this right to information is unlimited in time. And here the answer would be in the negative. The limitation of the right to receive information would be linked to the statute of limitations of the right to claim the corresponding commission. If the right to receive the commission were undoubtedly time-barred, it could be argued that it would not be possible to receive information about it. But for such an exception, the statute of limitations must be clear, therefore, taking into account possible interruptions due to claims, even extrajudicial ones. In case of doubt, it will be necessary to recognise the right to demand the information, without prejudice to later invoking and recognising the impossibility of claiming the commission if the right is time-barred. And for this we must consider the limitation period for claiming commissions (in general, three years) and that of the right to claim compensation for clientele (one year).

      In short: it does not seem that the right to receive information and to examine the principal’s documentation is limited by the term of the agency contract; although, on the other hand, it would be appropriate to analyse the possible limitation period for claiming commissions. In the absence of a clear answer to this question, the right to information should, in our opinion, prevail, without prejudice to the fact that the result may not entitle the claim because it is time-barred.

      SUMMARY: In large-scale events such as the Paris Olympics certain companies will attempt to “wildly” associate their brand with the event through a practice called “ambush marketing”, defined by caselaw as “an advertising strategy implemented by a company in order to associate its commercial image with that of an event, and thus to benefit from the media impact of said event, without paying the related rights and without first obtaining the event organizer’s authorization” (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912). A risky and punishable practice, that might sometimes yet be an option yet.

      Key takeaways

      • Ambush marketing might be a punished practice but is not prohibited as such;
      • As a counterpart of their investment, sponsors and official partners benefit from an extensive legal protection against all forms of ambush marketing in the event concerned, through various general texts (counterfeiting, parasitism, intellectual property) or more specific ones (e.g. sport law);
      • The Olympics Games are subject to specific regulations that further strengthen this protection, particularly in terms of intellectual property.
      • But these rights are not absolute, and they are still thin opportunities for astute ambush marketing.

      The protection offered to sponsors and official partners of sporting and cultural events from ambush marketing

      With a budget of over 4 billion euros, the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games are financed mostly by various official partners and sponsors, who in return benefit from a right to use Olympic and Paralympic properties to be able to associate their own brand image and distinctive signs with these events.

      Ambush marketing is not punishable as such under French law, but several scattered texts provide extensive protection against ambush marketing for sponsors and partners of sporting or cultural continental-wide or world-wide events. Indeed, sponsors are legitimately entitled to peacefully enjoy the rights offered to them in return for large-scale investments in events such as the FIFA or rugby World Cups, or the Olympic Games.

      In particular, official sponsors and organizers of such events may invoke:

      • the “classic” protections offered by intellectual property law (trademark law and copyright) in the context of infringement actions based on the French Intellectual Property Code,
      • tort law (parasitism and unfair competition based on article 1240 of the French Civil Code);
      • consumer law (misleading commercial practices) based on the French Consumer Code,
      • but also more specific texts such as the protection of the exploitation rights of sports federations and sports event organizers derived from the events or competitions they organize, as set out in article L.333-1 of the French Sports Code, which gives sports event organizers an exploitation monopoly.

      The following ambush marketing practices were sanctioned on the abovementioned grounds:

      • The use of a tennis competition name and of the trademark associated with it during the sporting event: The organization of online bets, by an online betting operator, on the Roland Garros tournament, using the protected sign and trademark Roland Garros to target the matches on which the bets were organized. The unlawful exploitation of the sporting event, was punished and 400 K€ were allowed as damages, based on article L. 333-1 of the French Sports Code, since only the French Tennis Federation (F.F.T.) owns the right to exploit Roland Garros. The use of the trademark was also punished as counterfeiting (with 300 K€ damages) and parasitism (with 500 K€ damages) (Paris Court of Appeal, Oct. 14, 2009, Case No 08/19179);
      • An advertising campaign taking place during a film festival and reproducing the event’s trademark: The organization, during the Cannes Film Festival, of a digital advertising campaign by a cosmetics brand through the publication on its social networks of videos showing the beauty makeovers of the brand’s muses, in some of which the official poster of the Cannes Film Festival was visible, one of which reproduced the registered trademark of the “Palme d’Or”, was punished on the grounds of copyright infringement and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Judicial Court, Dec. 11, 2020, Case No19/08543);
      • An advertising campaign aimed at falsely claiming to be an official partner of an event: The use, during the Cannes Film Festival, of the slogan “official hairdresser for women” together with the expressions “Cannes” and “Cannes Festival”, and other publications falsely leading the public to believe that the hairdresser was an official partner, to the detriment of the only official hairdresser of the Cannes festival, was punished on the grounds of unfair competition and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912).

      These financial penalties may be combined with injunctions to cease these behaviors, and/or publication in the press under penalty.

      An even greater protection for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games

      The Paris 2024 Olympic Games are also subject to specific regulations.

      Firstly, Article L.141-5 of the French Sports Code, enacted for the benefit of the “Comité national olympique et sportif français” (CNOSF) and the “Comité de l’organisation des Jeux Olympiques et Paralympiques de Paris 2024” (COJOP), protects Olympic signs such as the national Olympic emblems, but also the emblems, the flag, motto and Olympic symbol, Olympic anthem, logo, mascot, slogan and posters of the Olympic Games, the year of the Olympic Games “city + year”, the terms “Jeux Olympiques”, “Olympisme”, “Olympiade”, “JO”, “olympique”, “olympien” and “olympienne”. Under no circumstances may these signs be reproduced or even imitated by third-party companies. The COJOP has also published a guide to the protection of the Olympic trademark, outlining the protected symbols, trademarks and signs, as well as the protection of the official partners of the Olympic Games.

      Secondly, Law no. 2018-202 of March 26, 2018 on the organization of the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games adds even more specific prohibitions, such as the reservation for official sponsors of advertising space located near Olympic venues, or located on the Olympic and Paralympic torch route. This protection is unique in the context of the Olympic Games, but usually unregulated in the context of simple sporting events.

      The following practices, for example, have already been sanctioned on the above-mentioned grounds:

      • Reproduction of a logo imitating the well-known “Olympic” trademark on a clothing collection: The marketing of a collection of clothing, during the 2016 Olympic Games, bearing a logo (five hearts in the colors of the 5 Olympic colors intersecting in the image of the Olympic logo) imitating the Olympic symbol in association with the words “RIO” and “RIO 2016”, was punished on the grounds of parasitism (10 K€ damages) and articles L. 141-5 of the French Sports Code (35 K€) and L. 713-1 of the French Intellectual Property Code (10 K€ damages) (Paris Judicial Court, June 7, 2018, Case No16/10605);
      • The organization of a contest on social networks using protected symbols: During the 2018 Olympic Games in PyeongChang, a car rental company organized an online game inviting Internet users to nominate the athletes they wanted to win a clock radio, associated with the hashtags “#JO2018” (“#OJ2018”), “#Jeuxolympiques” (“#Olympicsgame”) or “C’est parti pour les jeux Olympiques” (“let’s go for the Olympic Games”) without authorization from the CNOSF, owner of these distinctive signs under the 2018 law and article L.141-5 of the French Sport Code and punished on these grounds with 20 K€ damages and of 10 K€ damages for parasitism (Paris Judicial Court, May 29, 2020, n°18/14115).

      These regulations offer official partners greater protection for their investments against ambush marketing practices from non-official sponsors.

      Some marketing operations might be exempted

      An analysis of case law and promotional practices nonetheless reveals the contours of certain advertising practices that could be authorized (i.e. not sanctioned by the above-mentioned texts), provided they are skillfully prepared and presented. Here are a few exemples :

      • Communication of information for advertising purposes: The use of the results of a rugby match and the announcement of a forthcoming match in a newspaper to promote a motor vehicle and its distinctive features was deemed lawful: “France 13 Angleterre 24 – the Fiat 500 congratulates England on its victory and looks forward to seeing the French team on March 9 for France-Italy” (France 13 Angleterre 24 – la Fiat 500 félicite l’Angleterre pour sa victoire et donne rendez-vous à l’équipe de France le 9 mars pour France-Italie) the judges having considered that this publication “merely reproduces a current sporting result, acquired and made public on the front page of the sports newspaper, and refers to a future match also known as already announced by the newspaper in a news article” (Court of cassation, May 20, 2014, Case No 13-12.102).
      • Sponsorship of athletes, including those taking part in Olympic competitions: Subject to compliance with the applicable regulatory framework, particularly as regards models, any company may enter into partnerships with athletes taking part in the Olympic Games, for example by donating clothing bearing the desired logo or brand, which they could wear during their participation in the various events. Athletes may also, under certain conditions, broadcast acknowledgements from their partner (even if unofficial). Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter governs the use of athletes’, coaches’ and officials’ images for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.

      The combined legal and marketing approach to the conception and preparation of the message of such a communication operation is essential to avoid legal proceedings, particularly on the grounds of parasitism; one might therefore legitimately contemplate advertising campaigns, particularly clever, or even malicious ones.

      In this first episode of Legalmondo’s Distribution Talks series, I spoke with Ignacio Alonso, a Madrid-based lawyer with extensive experience in international commercial distribution.

      Main discussion points:

      • in Spain, there is no specific law for distribution agreements, which are governed by the general rules of the Commercial Code;
      • therefore, it is essential to draft a clear and comprehensive contract, which will be the primary source of the parties’ rights and obligations;
      • it is also good to be aware of Spanish case law on commercial distribution, which in some cases applies the law on commercial agency by analogy.
      • the most common issues involving foreign producers distributing in Spain arise at the time of termination of the relationship, mainly because case law grants the terminated distributor an indemnity of clientele or goodwill if similar prerequisites to those in the agency regulations apply.
      • another frequent dispute concerns the adequacy of the notice period for terminating the contract, especially if there is no agreement between the parties: the advice is to follow what the agency regulations stipulate and thus establish a minimum notice period of one month for each year of the contract’s duration, up to 6 months for agreements lasting more than five years;
      • regarding dispute resolution tools, mediation is an option that should be carefully considered because it is quick, inexpensive, and allows a shared solution to be sought flexibly without disrupting the business relationship.
      • if mediation fails, the parties can provide for recourse to arbitration or state court. The choice depends on the case’s specific circumstances, and one factor in favor of jurisdiction is the possibility of appeal, which is excluded in the case of arbitration.

      Go deeper

      Summary

      On 1 June 2022, Regulation EU n. 720/2022, i.e.: the new Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (hereinafter: “VBER”), replaced the previous version (Regulation EU n. 330/2010), expired on 31 May 2022.

      The new VBER and the new vertical guidelines (hereinafter: “Guidelines”) have received the main evidence gathered during the lifetime of the previous VBER and contain some relevant provisions affecting the discipline of all B2B agreements among businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain.

      In this article, we will focus on the impact of the new VBER on sales through digital platforms, listing the main novelties impacting distribution chains, including a platform for marketing products/services.

      The general discipline of vertical agreements

      Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibits all agreements that prevent, restrict, or distort competition within the EU market, listing the main types, e.g.: price fixing; market partitioning; limitations on production/development/investment; unfair terms, etc.

      However, Article 101(3) TFEU exempts from such restrictions the agreements that contribute to improving the EU market, to be identified in a special category Regulation.

      The VBER establishes the category of vertical agreements (i.e., agreements between businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain), determining which of these agreements are exempted from Article 101(1) TFEU prohibition.

      In short, vertical agreements are presumed to be exempted (and therefore valid) if they do not contain so-called “hardcore restrictions” (i.e., severe restrictions of competition, such as an absolute ban on sales in a territory or the manufacturer’s determination of the distributor’s resale price) and if neither party’s market share exceeds 30%.

      The exempted agreements benefit from what has been termed the “safe harbour” of the VBER. In contrast, the others will be subject to the general prohibition of Article 101(1) TFEU unless they can benefit from an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

      The innovations introduced by the new VBER to online platforms

      The first relevant aspect concerns the classification of the platforms, as the European Commission excluded that the online platform generally meets the conditions to be categorized as agency agreements.

      While there have never been doubts concerning platforms that operate by purchasing and reselling products (classic example: Amazon Retail), some have arisen concerning those platforms that merely promote the products of third parties without carrying out the activity of resale (classic example: Amazon Marketplace).

      With this statement, the European Commission wanted to clear the field of doubt, making explicit that intermediation service providers (such as online platforms) qualify as suppliers (as opposed to commercial agents) under the VBER. This reflects the approach of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 (“P2B Regulation”), which has, for the first time, dictated a specific discipline for digital platforms. It provided for a set of rules to create a “fair, transparent, and predictable environment” for smaller businesses and customers” and for the rationale of the Digital Markets Act, banning certain practices used by large platforms acting as “gatekeepers”.

      Therefore, all contracts concluded between manufacturers and platforms (defined as ‘providers of online intermediation services’) are subject to all the restrictions imposed by the VBER. These include the price, the territories to which or the customers to whom the intermediated goods or services may be sold, or the restrictions relating to online advertising and selling.

      Thus, to give an example, the operator of a platform may not impose a fixed or minimum sale price for a transaction promoted through the platform.

      The second most impactful aspect concerns hybrid platforms, i.e., competing in the relevant market to sell intermediated goods or services. Amazon is the most well-known example, as it is a provider of intermediation services (“Amazon Marketplace”), and – at the same time – it distributes the products of those parties (“Amazon Retail”). We have previously explored the distinction between those 2 business models (and the consequences in terms of intellectual property infringement) here.

      The new VBER explicitly does not apply to hybrid platforms. Therefore, the agreements concluded among such platforms and manufacturers are subject to the limitations of the TFEU, as such providers may have the incentive to favour their sales and the ability to influence the outcome of competition between undertakings that use their online intermediation services.

      Those agreements must be assessed individually under Article 101 of the TFEU, as they do not necessarily restrict competition within the meaning of TFEU, or they may fulfil the conditions of an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

      The third very relevant aspect concerns the parity obligations (also referred to as Most Favoured Nation Clauses, or MFNs), i.e., the contract provisions in which a seller (directly or indirectly) agrees to give the buyer the best terms it makes available to any other buyer.

      Indeed, platforms’ contractual terms often contain parity obligation clauses to prevent users from offering their products/services at lower prices or on better conditions on their websites or other platforms.

      The new VBER deals explicitly with parity clauses, making a distinction between clauses whose purpose is to prohibit users of a platform from selling goods or services on more favourable terms through competing platforms (so-called “wide parity clauses”), and clauses that prohibit sales on more favourable terms only in respect of channels operated directly by the users (so-called “narrow parity clauses”).

      Wide parity clauses do not benefit from the VBER exemption; therefore, such obligations must be assessed individually under Article 101(3) TFEU.

      On the other hand, narrow parity clauses continue to benefit from the exemption already granted by the old VBER if they do not exceed the threshold of 30% of the relevant market share set out in Article 3 of the new VBER. However, the new Guidelines warn against using overly narrow parity obligations by online platforms covering a significant share of users, stating that if there is no evidence of pro-competitive effects, the benefit of the block exemption is likely to be withdrawn.

      Impact and takeaways

      The new VBER entered into force on 1 June 2022 and is already applicable to agreements signed after that date. Agreements already in force on 31 May 2022 that satisfy the conditions for exemption under the current VBER but do not satisfy the requirements under the new VBER shall benefit from a one-year transitional period.

      The new regime will be the playing field for all platform-driven sales over the next 12 years (the regulation expires on 31 May 2034). Currently, the rather restrictive novelties on hybrid platforms and parity obligations will likely necessitate substantial revisions to existing trade agreements.

      Here, then, are some tips for managing contracts and relationships with online platforms:

      • the new VBER is the right opportunity to review the existing distribution networks. The revision will have to consider not only the new regulatory limits (e.g., the ban on wide parity clauses) but also the new discipline reserved for hybrid platforms and dual distribution to coordinate the different distribution channels as efficiently as possible, by the stakes set by the new VBER and the Guidelines;
      • platforms are likely to play an even greater role during the next decade; it is, therefore, essential to consider these sales channels from the outset, coordinating them with the other existing ones (retail, direct sales, distributors, etc.) to avoid jeopardizing the marketing of products or services;
      • the European legislator’s attention toward platforms is growing. Looking up from the VBER, one should not forget that they are subject to a multitude of other European regulations, which are gradually regulating the sector and which must be considered when concluding contracts with platforms. The reference is not only to the recent Digital Market Act and P2B Regulation but also to the protection of IP rights on platforms, which – as we have already seen – is still an open issue.

      Summary

      To avoid disputes with important suppliers, it is advisable to plan purchases over the medium and long term and not operate solely on the basis of orders and order confirmations. Planning makes it possible to agree on the duration of the ‘supply agreement, minimum volumes of products to be delivered and delivery schedules, prices, and the conditions under which prices can be varied over time.
      The use of a framework purchase agreement can help avoid future uncertainties and allows various options to be used to manage commodity price fluctuations depending on the type of products , such as automatic price indexing or agreement to renegotiate in the event of commodity fluctuations beyond a certain set tolerance period.

      I read in a press release: “These days, the glass industry is sending wine companies new unilateral contract amendments with price changes of 20%…”

      What can one do to avoid the imposition of price increases by suppliers? 

      • Know your rights and act in an informed manner
      • Plan and organise your supply chain

      Does my supplier have the right to increase prices?

      If contracts have already been concluded, e.g., orders have already been confirmed by the supplier, the answer is often no.

      It is not legitimate to request a price change. It is much less legitimate to communicate it unilaterally, with the threat of cancelling the order or not delivering the goods if the request is not granted.

      What if he tells me it is force majeure?

      That’s wrong: increased costs are not a force majeure but rather an unforeseen excessive onerousness, which hardly happens.

      What if the supplier canceled the order, unilaterally increased the price, or did not deliver the goods?

      He would be in breach of contract and liable to pay damages for violating his contractual obligations.

      How can one avoid a tug-of-war with suppliers?

      The tools are there. You have to know them and use them.

      It is necessary to plan purchases in the medium term, agreeing with suppliers on a schedule in which are set out:

      • the quantities of products to be ordered
      • the delivery terms
      • the durationof the agreement
      • the pricesof the products or raw materials
      • the conditions under which prices can be varied

      There is a very effective instrument to do so: a framework purchase agreement.

      Using a framework purchase agreement, the parties negotiate the above elements, which will be valid for the agreed period.

      Once the agreement is concluded, product orders will follow, governed by the framework agreement, without the need to renegotiate the content of individual deliveries each time.

      For an in-depth discussion of this contract, see this article.

      • “Yes, but my suppliers will never sign it!”

      Why not? Ask them to explain the reason.

      This type of agreement is in the interest of both parties. It allows planning future orders and grants certainty as to whether, when, and how much the parties can change the price.

      In contrast, acting without written agreements forces the parties to operate in an environment of uncertainty. Suppliers can request price increases from one day to the next and refuse supply if the changes are not accepted.

      How are price changes for future supplies regulated?

      Depending on the type of products or services and the raw materials or energy relevant in determining the final price, there are several possibilities.

      • The first option is to index the price automatically. E.g., if the cost of a barrel of Brent oil increases/decreases by 10%, the party concerned is entitled to request a corresponding adjustment of the product’s price in all orders placed as of the following week.
      • An alternative is to provide for a price renegotiation in the event of a fluctuation of the reference commodity. E.g., suppose the LME Aluminium index of the London Stock Exchange increases above a certain threshold. In that case, the interested party may request a price renegotiationfor orders in the period following the increase.

      What if the parties do not agree on new prices?

      It is possible to terminate the contract or refer the price determination to a third party, who would act as arbitrator and set the new prices for future orders.

      Summary

      The framework supply contract is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier) that take place over a certain period of time. This agreement determines the main elements of future contracts such as price, product volumes, delivery terms, technical or quality specifications, and the duration of the agreement.

      The framework contract is useful for ensuring continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a certain product that is essential for planning industrial or commercial activity. While the general terms and conditions of purchase or sale are the rules that apply to all suppliers or customers of the company. The framework contract is advisable to be concluded with essential suppliers for the continuity of business activity, in general or in relation to a particular project.

      What I am talking about in this article:

      • What is the supply framework agreement?
      • What is the function of the supply framework agreement?
      • The difference with the general conditions of sale or purchase
      • When to enter a purchase framework agreement?
      • When is it beneficial to conclude a sales framework agreement?
      • The content of the supply framework agreement
      • Price revision clause and hardship
      • Delivery terms in the supply framework agreement
      • The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts
      • International sales: applicable law and dispute resolution arrangements

      What is a framework supply agreement?

      It is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier), which will take place over a certain period.

      It is therefore referred to as a “framework agreement” because it is an agreement that establishes the rules of a future series of sales and purchase contracts, determining their primary elements (such as the price, the volumes of products to be sold and purchased, the delivery terms of the products, and the duration of the contract).

      After concluding the framework agreement, the parties will exchange orders and order confirmations, entering a series of autonomous sales contracts without re-discussing the covenants already defined in the framework agreement.

      Depending on one’s point of view, this agreement is also called a sales framework agreement (if the seller/supplier uses it) or a purchasing framework agreement (if the customer proposes it).

      What is the function of the framework supply agreement?

      It is helpful to arrange a framework agreement in all cases where the parties intend to proceed with a series of purchases/sales of products over time and are interested in giving stability to the commercial agreement by determining its main elements.

      In particular, the purchase framework agreement may be helpful to a company that wishes to ensure continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a specific product that is essential for planning its industrial or commercial activity (raw material, semi-finished product, component).

      By concluding the framework agreement, the company can obtain, for example, a commitment from the supplier to supply a particular minimum volume of products, at a specific price, with agreed terms and technical specifications, for a certain period.

      This agreement is also beneficial, at the same time, to the seller/supplier, which can plan sales for that period and organize, in turn, the supply chain that enables it to procure the raw materials and components necessary to produce the products.

      What is the difference between a purchase or sales framework agreement and the general terms and conditions?

      Whereas the framework agreement is an agreement that is used with one or more suppliers for a specific product and a certain time frame, determining the essential elements of future contracts, the general purchase (or sales) conditions are the rules that apply to all the company’s suppliers (or customers).

      The first agreement, therefore, is negotiated and defined on a case-by-case basis. At the same time, the general conditions are prepared unilaterally by the company, and the customers or suppliers (depending on whether they are sales or purchase conditions) adhere to and accept that the general conditions apply to the individual order and/or future contracts.

      The two agreements might also co-exist: in that case; it is a good idea to specify which contract should prevail in the event of a discrepancy between the different provisions (usually, this hierarchy is envisaged, ranging from the special to the general: order – order confirmation; framework agreement; general terms and conditions of purchase).

      When is it important to conclude a purchase framework agreement?

      It is beneficial to conclude this agreement when dealing with a mono-supplier or a supplier that would be very difficult to replace if it stopped selling products to the purchasing company.

      The risks one aims to avoid or diminish are so-called stock-outs, i.e., supply interruptions due to the supplier’s lack of availability of products or because the products are available, but the parties cannot agree on the delivery time or sales price.

      Another result that can be achieved is to bind a strategic supplier for a certain period by agreeing that it will reserve an agreed share of production for the buyer on predetermined terms and conditions and avoid competition with offers from third parties interested in the products for the duration of the agreement.

      When is it helpful to conclude a sales framework agreement?

      This agreement allows the seller/supplier to plan sales to a particular customer and thus to plan and organize its production and logistical capacity for the agreed period, avoiding extra costs or delays.

      Planning sales also makes it possible to correctly manage financial obligations and cash flows with a medium-term vision, harmonizing commitments and investments with the sales to one’s customers.

      What is the content of the supply framework agreement?

      There is no standard model of this agreement, which originated from business practice to meet the requirements indicated above.

      Generally, the agreement provides for a fixed period (e.g., 12 months) in which the parties undertake to conclude a series of purchases and sales of products, determining the price and terms of supply and the main covenants of future sales contracts.

      The most important clauses are:

      • the identification of products and technical specifications (often identified in an annex)
      • the minimum/maximum volume of supplies
      • the possible obligation to purchase/sell a minimum/maximum volume of products
      • the schedule of supplies
      • the delivery times
      • the determination of the price and the conditions for its possible modification (see also the next paragraph)
      • impediments to performance (Force Majeure)
      • cases of Hardship
      • penalties for delay or non-performance or for failure to achieve the agreed volumes
      • the hierarchy between the framework agreement and the orders and any other contracts between the parties
      • applicable law and dispute resolution (especially in international agreements)

      How to handle price revision in a supply contract?

      A crucial clause, especially in times of strong fluctuations in the prices of raw materials, transport, and energy, is the price revision clause.

      In the absence of an agreement on this issue, the parties bear the risk of a price increase by undertaking to respect the conditions initially agreed upon; except in exceptional cases (where the fluctuation is strong, affects a short period, and is caused by unforeseeable events), it isn’t straightforward to invoke the supervening excessive onerousness, which allows renegotiating the price, or the contract to be terminated.

      To avoid the uncertainty generated by price fluctuations, it is advisable to agree in the contract on the mechanisms for revising the price (e.g., automatic indexing following the quotation of raw materials). The so-called Hardship or Excessive Onerousness clause establishes what price fluctuation limits are accepted by the parties and what happens if the variations go beyond these limits, providing for the obligation to renegotiate the price or the termination of the contract if no agreement is reached within a certain period.

      How to manage delivery terms in a supply agreement?

      Another fundamental pact in a medium to long-term supply relationship concerns delivery terms. In this case, it is necessary to reconcile the purchaser’s interest in respecting the agreed dates with the supplier’s interest in avoiding claims for damages in the event of a delay, especially in the case of sales requiring intercontinental transport.

      The first thing to be clarified in this regard concerns the nature of delivery deadlines: are they essential or indicative? In the first case, the party affected has the right to terminate (i.e., wind up) the agreement in the event of non-compliance with the term; in the second case, due diligence, information, and timely notification of delays may be required, whereas termination is not a remedy that may be automatically invoked in the event of a delay.

      A useful instrument in this regard is the penalty clause: with this covenant, it is established that for each day/week/month of delay, a sum of money is due by way of damages in favor of the party harmed by the delay.

      If quantified correctly and not excessively, the penalty is helpful for both parties because it makes it possible to predict the damages that may be claimed for the delay, quantifying them in a fair and determined sum. Consequently, the seller is not exposed to claims for damages related to factors beyond his control. At the same time, the buyer can easily calculate the compensation for the delay without the need for further proof.

      The same mechanism, among other things, may be adopted to govern the buyer’s delay in accepting delivery of the goods.

      Finally, it is a good idea to specify the limit of the penalty (e.g.,10 percent of the price of the goods) and a maximum period of grace for the delay, beyond which the party concerned is entitled to terminate the contract by retaining the penalty.

      The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts

      A situation that is often confused with excessive onerousness, but is, in fact, quite different, is that of Force Majeure, i.e., the supervening impossibility of performance of the contractual obligation due to any event beyond the reasonable control of the party affected, which could not have been reasonably foreseen and the effects of which cannot be overcome by reasonable efforts.

      The function of this clause is to set forth clearly when the parties consider that Force Majeure may be invoked, what specific events are included (e.g., a lock-down of the production plant by order of the authority), and what are the consequences for the parties’ obligations (e.g., suspension of the obligation for a certain period, as long as the cause of impossibility of performance lasts, after which the party affected by performance may declare its intention to dissolve the contract).

      If the wording of this clause is general (as is often the case), the risk is that it will be of little use; it is also advisable to check that the regulation of force majeure complies with the law applicable to the contract (here an in-depth analysis indicating the regime provided for by 42 national laws).

      Applicable law and dispute resolution clauses

      Suppose the customer or supplier is based abroad. In that case, several significant differences must be borne in mind: the first is the agreement’s language, which must be intelligible to the foreign party, therefore usually in English or another language familiar to the parties, possibly also in two languages with parallel text.

      The second issue concerns the applicable law, which should be expressly indicated in the agreement. This subject matter is vast, and here we can say that the decision on the applicable law must be made on a case-by-case basis, intentionally: in fact, it is not always convenient to recall the application of the law of one’s own country.

      In most international sales contracts, the 1980 Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”) applies, a uniform law that is balanced, clear, and easy to understand. Therefore, it is not advisable to exclude it.

      Finally, in a supply framework agreement with an international supplier, it is important to identify the method of dispute resolution: no solution fits all. Choosing a country’s jurisdiction is not always the right decision (indeed, it can often prove counterproductive).

      Giuliano Stasio

      业务领域

      • 仲裁
      • 契约
      • 电子商务
      • 知识产权
      • 房地产
      联系方式 Giuliano

      写信给 Giuliano





        阅读 Legalmondo 的隐私政策
        This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

        How to manage price changes in the supply chain

        2023年3月27日

        • 意大利
        • 契约
        • 分销协议

        When selling health-related products, the question frequently arises as to which product category, and therefore which regulatory regime, they fall under. This question often arises when distinguishing between food supplements and medicinal products. But in other constellations, too, difficult questions of demarcation arise, which must be answered with a view to legally compliant marketing.

        In a highly interesting case, the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) of Düsseldorf, Germany, recently had to classify a CBD-containing (Cannabidiol) mouth spray that was explicitly advertised by its manufacturer as a “cosmetic” and therefore not suitable for human consumption. The Ingredients of the product were labelled: « Cannabis sativa seed oil, cannabidiol from cannabis extract, tincture or resin, cannabis sativa leaf extract ».

        The Product is additionally also labelled as follows: “Cosmetic oral care spray with hemp leaf extract. » The Instructions for use are: « Spray a maximum of 3 sprays a day into the mouth as desired. Spit out after 30 seconds and do not swallow. »

        A spray of the Product contains 10 mg CBD. This results in a maximum daily dose of 30 mg CBD as specified by the company.

        At the same time, however, it was pointed out that the “consumption” of a spray shot was harmless to health.

        The mouth spray could therefore be consumed like a food, but was declared as a “cosmetic”. This is precisely where the court had to examine whether the prohibition order based on food law was lawful.

        For the definition of cosmetic products Article 2 sentence 4 lit. e) Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 refers to Directive 76/768/EEC. This was replaced by Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009. Cosmetic products are defined in Article 2(1)(a) as follows: “‘cosmetic product’ means any substance or mixture intended to be placed in contact with the external parts of the human body (epidermis, hair system, nails, lips and external genital organs) or with the teeth and the mucous membranes of the oral cavity with a view exclusively or mainly to cleaning them, perfuming them, changing their appearance, protecting them, keeping them in good condition or correcting body odours ”.

        Here too, it is not the composition of the product that is decisive, but its intended purpose, which is to be determined on the basis of objective criteria according to general public opinion based on concrete evidence.

        According to the system of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002, Article 2 sentence 1 first defines foodstuffs in general and then excludes cosmetic products under sentence 4 lit. e). According to the definition in Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009, cosmetic products must have an exclusive or at least predominant cosmetic purpose. It can be concluded from this system that the exclusivity or predominance must be positively established. If it is not possible to determine which purpose predominates, the product is a foodstuff.

        The Düsseldorf Administrative Court had to deal with this question in the aforementioned legal dispute brought by the distributor against an official prohibition order in the form of a so-called general ruling („Allgemeinverfügung“). By notice dated July 11, 2020, the competent authority issued a general ruling prohibiting the marketing of foodstuffs containing “cannabidiol (as ‘CBD isolates’ or ‘hemp extracts enriched with CBD’)” in their urban area. The company, based in this city, offered the mouth spray described above.

        In a ruling dated 25.10.2024 (Courts Ref. : 26 K 2072/23), the court dismissed the company’s claim. The court’s main arguments were :

        1. Classification as food: the CBD spray was correctly classified as food by the authority, as it was reasonable to expect that it could be swallowed despite indications to the contrary. According to an objective perception of the market, there is a now established expectation of an average informed, attentive and reasonable consumer to the effect that CBD oils are intended as “lifestyle” products for oral ingestion, from which consumers hope for positive health effects The labelling as “cosmetic” was refuted by the objective consumer expectations and the nature of the application.
        2. No medicinal product status: Due to the low dosage in this case (max. 30 mg CBD per day), the product was not classified as a functional medicinal product, as there was no sufficiently proven pharmacological effect.
        3. Legal basis of the injunction: The prohibition of the sale of the products by the defendant was based on a general order, which was confirmed as lawful by the court.

        In the ruling, the court emphasizes the objective consumer expectation and clarifies that products cannot be exempted from a different regulatory classification by the authorities or the courts solely by their labelling.

        Conclusion: The decision presented underlines the considerable importance of the “correct” classification of a health product in the respective legal product category. In addition to the classic distinction between foodstuffs (food supplements) and medicinal products, comparable issues also arise with other product types. In this case in the constellation of cosmetics versus food – combined with the special legal component of the use of CBD.

        The author of this article is Matthias Hesshaus

        Commercial agents have specific regulations with rights and obligations that are “mandatory”: those who sign an agency contract cannot derogate from them. Answering whether an influencer can be an agent is essential because, if he or she is an agent, the agent regulations will apply to him or her.

        Let’s take it one step at a time. The influencer we will talk about is the person who, with their actions and comments (blogs, social media accounts, videos, events, or a bit of everything), talks to their followers about the advantages of certain products or services identified with a certain third-party brand. In exchange for this, the influencer is paid.[1]

        A commercial agent is someone who promotes the contracting of others’ products or services, does so in a stable way, and gets paid in return. He or she can also conclude the contract, but this is not essential.

        The law imposes certain obligations and guarantees rights to those signing an agency contract. If the influencer is considered an “agent”, he or she should also have them. And there are several of them: for example, the duration, the notice to be given to terminate the contract, the obligations of the parties… And the most relevant, the right of the agent to receive compensation at the end of the relationship for the clientele that has been generated. If an influencer is an agent, he would also have this right.

        How can an influencer be assessed as an agent? For that we must analyse two things: (a) the contract (and be careful because there is a contract, even if it is not written) and (b) how the parties have behaved.

        The elements that, in my opinion, are most relevant to conclude that an influencer is an agent would be the following:

         

        a) the influencer promotes the contracting of services or the purchase of products and does so independently.

        The contract will indicate what the influencer must do. It will be clearer to consider him as an agent if his comments encourage contracting: for example, if they include a link to the manufacturer’s website, if he offers a discount code, if he allows orders to be placed with him. And if he does so as an independent “professional”, and not as an employee (with a timetable, means, instructions).

        It may be more difficult to consider him as an agent if he limits himself to talking about the benefits of the product or service, appearing in advertising as a brand image, and using a certain product, and speaking well of it. The important thing, in my opinion, is to examine whether the influencer’s activity is aimed at getting people to buy the product he or she is talking about, or whether what he or she is doing is more generic persuasion (appearing in advertising, lending his or her image to a product, carrying out demonstrations of its use), or even whether he or she is only seeking to promote himself or herself as a vehicle for general information (for example, influencers who make comparisons of products without trying to get people to buy one or the other). In the first case (trying to get people to buy the product) it would be easier to consider it as an “agent”, and less so in the other examples.

         

        b) this “promotion” is done in a continuous or stable manner.

        Be careful because this continuity or stability does not mean that the contract has to be of indefinite duration. Rather, it is the opposite of a sporadic relationship. A one-year contract may be sufficient, while several unconnected interventions, even if they last longer, may not be sufficient.

        In this case, influencers who make occasional comments, who intervene with isolated actions, who limit themselves to making comparisons without promoting the purchase of one or the other, and even if all this leads to sales, even if their comments are frequent and even if they can have a great influence on the behavior of their followers, would be excluded as agents.

         

        c) they receive remuneration for their activity.

        An influencer who is remunerated based on sales (e.g., by promoting a discount code, a specific link, or referring to your website for orders) can more easily be considered as an agent. But also, if he or she only receives a fixed amount for their promotion. On the other hand, influencers who do not receive any remuneration from the brand (e.g. someone who talks about the benefits of a product in comparison with others, but without linking it to its promotion) would be excluded.

         

        Conclusion

        The borderline between what qualifies an influencer as an agent and what does not can be very thin, especially because contracts are often not unambiguous and sometimes their services are multiple. The most important thing is to carefully analyse the contract and the parties’ behaviour.

        An influencer could be considered a commercial agent to the extent that his or her activity promotes the contracting of the product (not simply if he or she carries out informative or image work), that it is done on a stable basis (and not merely anecdotal or sporadic) and in exchange for remuneration.

        To assess the specific situation, it is essential to analyse the contract (if it is written, this is easier) and the parties’ behaviour.

        In short, to draw up a contract with an influencer or, if it has already been signed, but you want to conclude it, you will have to pay attention to these elements. As an influencer you may have a strong interest in being considered an agent at the end of the contract and thus be entitled to compensation, while as employer you will prefer the opposite.

        FINAL NOTE. In Spain and at the date of this comment (9 June 2024) I am not aware of any judgement dealing with this issue. My proposal is based on my experience of more than 30 years advising and litigating on agency contracts. On the other hand, and as far as I know, there is at least one judgment in Rome (Italy) dealing with the matter: Tribunale di Roma; Sezione Lavoro 4º, St. 2615 of 4 March 2024; R. G. n. 38445/2022.

        The commercial agent has the right to obtain certain information about the sales of the principal. The Spanish Law on Agency Contracts provides (15.2 LCA) that the agent has the right to demand to see the accounts of the principal in order to verify all matters relating to the commissions due to him. And also, to be provided with the information available to the principal and necessary to verify the amount of such commissions.

        This article is in line with the 1986 Commercial Agents Directive, according to which (12.3) the agent is entitled to demand to be provided with all information at the disposal of the principal, particularly an extract from the books of account, which is necessary to verify the amount of commission due to the agent. This may not be altered to the detriment of the commercial agent by agreement.

        The question is, does this right remain even after the termination of the agency contract? In other words: once the agency contract is terminated, can the agent request the information and documentation mentioned in these articles and is the Principal obliged to provide it?

        In our opinion, the rule does not say anything that limits this right, rather the opposite is to be expected. Therefore, to the extent that there is still any possible commission that may arise from such verification, the answer must be yes. Let us see.

        The right to demand the production of accounts exists so that the agent can verify the amount of commissions. And the agent is entitled to commissions for acts and operations concluded during the term of the contract (art. 12 LCA), but also for acts or operations concluded after the termination of the contract (art. 13 LCA), and for operations not carried out due to circumstances attributable to the principal (art. 17 LCA). In addition, the agent is entitled to have the commission accrued at the time when the act or transaction should have been executed (art. 14 LCA).

        All these transactions can take place after the conclusion of the contract. Consider the usual situation where orders are placed during the contract but are accepted or executed afterwards. To reduce the agent’s right to be informed only during the term of the contract would be to limit his entitlement to the corresponding commission unduly. And it should be borne in mind that the amount of the commissions during the last five years may also influence the calculation of the client (goodwill) indemnity (art. 28 LCA), so that the agent’s interest in knowing them is twofold: what he would receive as commission, and what could increase the basis for future indemnity.

        This has been confirmed, for example, by the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) of Madrid (AAP 227/2017, of 29 June [ECLI:ES:APM:2017:2873A]) which textually states:

        […] art. 15.2 of the Agency Contract Act provides for the right of the agent to demand the exhibition of the Principal’s accounts in the particulars necessary to verify everything relating to the commissions corresponding to him, as well as to be provided with the information available to the Principal and necessary to verify the amount. This does not prevent, […], the agency contract having already been terminated, as this does not imply that commissions would cease to accrue for policies, contracted with the mediation of the agent, which remain in force.

        The question then arises as to whether this right to information is unlimited in time. And here the answer would be in the negative. The limitation of the right to receive information would be linked to the statute of limitations of the right to claim the corresponding commission. If the right to receive the commission were undoubtedly time-barred, it could be argued that it would not be possible to receive information about it. But for such an exception, the statute of limitations must be clear, therefore, taking into account possible interruptions due to claims, even extrajudicial ones. In case of doubt, it will be necessary to recognise the right to demand the information, without prejudice to later invoking and recognising the impossibility of claiming the commission if the right is time-barred. And for this we must consider the limitation period for claiming commissions (in general, three years) and that of the right to claim compensation for clientele (one year).

        In short: it does not seem that the right to receive information and to examine the principal’s documentation is limited by the term of the agency contract; although, on the other hand, it would be appropriate to analyse the possible limitation period for claiming commissions. In the absence of a clear answer to this question, the right to information should, in our opinion, prevail, without prejudice to the fact that the result may not entitle the claim because it is time-barred.

        SUMMARY: In large-scale events such as the Paris Olympics certain companies will attempt to “wildly” associate their brand with the event through a practice called “ambush marketing”, defined by caselaw as “an advertising strategy implemented by a company in order to associate its commercial image with that of an event, and thus to benefit from the media impact of said event, without paying the related rights and without first obtaining the event organizer’s authorization” (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912). A risky and punishable practice, that might sometimes yet be an option yet.

        Key takeaways

        • Ambush marketing might be a punished practice but is not prohibited as such;
        • As a counterpart of their investment, sponsors and official partners benefit from an extensive legal protection against all forms of ambush marketing in the event concerned, through various general texts (counterfeiting, parasitism, intellectual property) or more specific ones (e.g. sport law);
        • The Olympics Games are subject to specific regulations that further strengthen this protection, particularly in terms of intellectual property.
        • But these rights are not absolute, and they are still thin opportunities for astute ambush marketing.

        The protection offered to sponsors and official partners of sporting and cultural events from ambush marketing

        With a budget of over 4 billion euros, the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games are financed mostly by various official partners and sponsors, who in return benefit from a right to use Olympic and Paralympic properties to be able to associate their own brand image and distinctive signs with these events.

        Ambush marketing is not punishable as such under French law, but several scattered texts provide extensive protection against ambush marketing for sponsors and partners of sporting or cultural continental-wide or world-wide events. Indeed, sponsors are legitimately entitled to peacefully enjoy the rights offered to them in return for large-scale investments in events such as the FIFA or rugby World Cups, or the Olympic Games.

        In particular, official sponsors and organizers of such events may invoke:

        • the “classic” protections offered by intellectual property law (trademark law and copyright) in the context of infringement actions based on the French Intellectual Property Code,
        • tort law (parasitism and unfair competition based on article 1240 of the French Civil Code);
        • consumer law (misleading commercial practices) based on the French Consumer Code,
        • but also more specific texts such as the protection of the exploitation rights of sports federations and sports event organizers derived from the events or competitions they organize, as set out in article L.333-1 of the French Sports Code, which gives sports event organizers an exploitation monopoly.

        The following ambush marketing practices were sanctioned on the abovementioned grounds:

        • The use of a tennis competition name and of the trademark associated with it during the sporting event: The organization of online bets, by an online betting operator, on the Roland Garros tournament, using the protected sign and trademark Roland Garros to target the matches on which the bets were organized. The unlawful exploitation of the sporting event, was punished and 400 K€ were allowed as damages, based on article L. 333-1 of the French Sports Code, since only the French Tennis Federation (F.F.T.) owns the right to exploit Roland Garros. The use of the trademark was also punished as counterfeiting (with 300 K€ damages) and parasitism (with 500 K€ damages) (Paris Court of Appeal, Oct. 14, 2009, Case No 08/19179);
        • An advertising campaign taking place during a film festival and reproducing the event’s trademark: The organization, during the Cannes Film Festival, of a digital advertising campaign by a cosmetics brand through the publication on its social networks of videos showing the beauty makeovers of the brand’s muses, in some of which the official poster of the Cannes Film Festival was visible, one of which reproduced the registered trademark of the “Palme d’Or”, was punished on the grounds of copyright infringement and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Judicial Court, Dec. 11, 2020, Case No19/08543);
        • An advertising campaign aimed at falsely claiming to be an official partner of an event: The use, during the Cannes Film Festival, of the slogan “official hairdresser for women” together with the expressions “Cannes” and “Cannes Festival”, and other publications falsely leading the public to believe that the hairdresser was an official partner, to the detriment of the only official hairdresser of the Cannes festival, was punished on the grounds of unfair competition and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912).

        These financial penalties may be combined with injunctions to cease these behaviors, and/or publication in the press under penalty.

        An even greater protection for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games

        The Paris 2024 Olympic Games are also subject to specific regulations.

        Firstly, Article L.141-5 of the French Sports Code, enacted for the benefit of the “Comité national olympique et sportif français” (CNOSF) and the “Comité de l’organisation des Jeux Olympiques et Paralympiques de Paris 2024” (COJOP), protects Olympic signs such as the national Olympic emblems, but also the emblems, the flag, motto and Olympic symbol, Olympic anthem, logo, mascot, slogan and posters of the Olympic Games, the year of the Olympic Games “city + year”, the terms “Jeux Olympiques”, “Olympisme”, “Olympiade”, “JO”, “olympique”, “olympien” and “olympienne”. Under no circumstances may these signs be reproduced or even imitated by third-party companies. The COJOP has also published a guide to the protection of the Olympic trademark, outlining the protected symbols, trademarks and signs, as well as the protection of the official partners of the Olympic Games.

        Secondly, Law no. 2018-202 of March 26, 2018 on the organization of the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games adds even more specific prohibitions, such as the reservation for official sponsors of advertising space located near Olympic venues, or located on the Olympic and Paralympic torch route. This protection is unique in the context of the Olympic Games, but usually unregulated in the context of simple sporting events.

        The following practices, for example, have already been sanctioned on the above-mentioned grounds:

        • Reproduction of a logo imitating the well-known “Olympic” trademark on a clothing collection: The marketing of a collection of clothing, during the 2016 Olympic Games, bearing a logo (five hearts in the colors of the 5 Olympic colors intersecting in the image of the Olympic logo) imitating the Olympic symbol in association with the words “RIO” and “RIO 2016”, was punished on the grounds of parasitism (10 K€ damages) and articles L. 141-5 of the French Sports Code (35 K€) and L. 713-1 of the French Intellectual Property Code (10 K€ damages) (Paris Judicial Court, June 7, 2018, Case No16/10605);
        • The organization of a contest on social networks using protected symbols: During the 2018 Olympic Games in PyeongChang, a car rental company organized an online game inviting Internet users to nominate the athletes they wanted to win a clock radio, associated with the hashtags “#JO2018” (“#OJ2018”), “#Jeuxolympiques” (“#Olympicsgame”) or “C’est parti pour les jeux Olympiques” (“let’s go for the Olympic Games”) without authorization from the CNOSF, owner of these distinctive signs under the 2018 law and article L.141-5 of the French Sport Code and punished on these grounds with 20 K€ damages and of 10 K€ damages for parasitism (Paris Judicial Court, May 29, 2020, n°18/14115).

        These regulations offer official partners greater protection for their investments against ambush marketing practices from non-official sponsors.

        Some marketing operations might be exempted

        An analysis of case law and promotional practices nonetheless reveals the contours of certain advertising practices that could be authorized (i.e. not sanctioned by the above-mentioned texts), provided they are skillfully prepared and presented. Here are a few exemples :

        • Communication of information for advertising purposes: The use of the results of a rugby match and the announcement of a forthcoming match in a newspaper to promote a motor vehicle and its distinctive features was deemed lawful: “France 13 Angleterre 24 – the Fiat 500 congratulates England on its victory and looks forward to seeing the French team on March 9 for France-Italy” (France 13 Angleterre 24 – la Fiat 500 félicite l’Angleterre pour sa victoire et donne rendez-vous à l’équipe de France le 9 mars pour France-Italie) the judges having considered that this publication “merely reproduces a current sporting result, acquired and made public on the front page of the sports newspaper, and refers to a future match also known as already announced by the newspaper in a news article” (Court of cassation, May 20, 2014, Case No 13-12.102).
        • Sponsorship of athletes, including those taking part in Olympic competitions: Subject to compliance with the applicable regulatory framework, particularly as regards models, any company may enter into partnerships with athletes taking part in the Olympic Games, for example by donating clothing bearing the desired logo or brand, which they could wear during their participation in the various events. Athletes may also, under certain conditions, broadcast acknowledgements from their partner (even if unofficial). Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter governs the use of athletes’, coaches’ and officials’ images for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.

        The combined legal and marketing approach to the conception and preparation of the message of such a communication operation is essential to avoid legal proceedings, particularly on the grounds of parasitism; one might therefore legitimately contemplate advertising campaigns, particularly clever, or even malicious ones.

        In this first episode of Legalmondo’s Distribution Talks series, I spoke with Ignacio Alonso, a Madrid-based lawyer with extensive experience in international commercial distribution.

        Main discussion points:

        • in Spain, there is no specific law for distribution agreements, which are governed by the general rules of the Commercial Code;
        • therefore, it is essential to draft a clear and comprehensive contract, which will be the primary source of the parties’ rights and obligations;
        • it is also good to be aware of Spanish case law on commercial distribution, which in some cases applies the law on commercial agency by analogy.
        • the most common issues involving foreign producers distributing in Spain arise at the time of termination of the relationship, mainly because case law grants the terminated distributor an indemnity of clientele or goodwill if similar prerequisites to those in the agency regulations apply.
        • another frequent dispute concerns the adequacy of the notice period for terminating the contract, especially if there is no agreement between the parties: the advice is to follow what the agency regulations stipulate and thus establish a minimum notice period of one month for each year of the contract’s duration, up to 6 months for agreements lasting more than five years;
        • regarding dispute resolution tools, mediation is an option that should be carefully considered because it is quick, inexpensive, and allows a shared solution to be sought flexibly without disrupting the business relationship.
        • if mediation fails, the parties can provide for recourse to arbitration or state court. The choice depends on the case’s specific circumstances, and one factor in favor of jurisdiction is the possibility of appeal, which is excluded in the case of arbitration.

        Go deeper

        Summary

        On 1 June 2022, Regulation EU n. 720/2022, i.e.: the new Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (hereinafter: “VBER”), replaced the previous version (Regulation EU n. 330/2010), expired on 31 May 2022.

        The new VBER and the new vertical guidelines (hereinafter: “Guidelines”) have received the main evidence gathered during the lifetime of the previous VBER and contain some relevant provisions affecting the discipline of all B2B agreements among businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain.

        In this article, we will focus on the impact of the new VBER on sales through digital platforms, listing the main novelties impacting distribution chains, including a platform for marketing products/services.

        The general discipline of vertical agreements

        Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibits all agreements that prevent, restrict, or distort competition within the EU market, listing the main types, e.g.: price fixing; market partitioning; limitations on production/development/investment; unfair terms, etc.

        However, Article 101(3) TFEU exempts from such restrictions the agreements that contribute to improving the EU market, to be identified in a special category Regulation.

        The VBER establishes the category of vertical agreements (i.e., agreements between businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain), determining which of these agreements are exempted from Article 101(1) TFEU prohibition.

        In short, vertical agreements are presumed to be exempted (and therefore valid) if they do not contain so-called “hardcore restrictions” (i.e., severe restrictions of competition, such as an absolute ban on sales in a territory or the manufacturer’s determination of the distributor’s resale price) and if neither party’s market share exceeds 30%.

        The exempted agreements benefit from what has been termed the “safe harbour” of the VBER. In contrast, the others will be subject to the general prohibition of Article 101(1) TFEU unless they can benefit from an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

        The innovations introduced by the new VBER to online platforms

        The first relevant aspect concerns the classification of the platforms, as the European Commission excluded that the online platform generally meets the conditions to be categorized as agency agreements.

        While there have never been doubts concerning platforms that operate by purchasing and reselling products (classic example: Amazon Retail), some have arisen concerning those platforms that merely promote the products of third parties without carrying out the activity of resale (classic example: Amazon Marketplace).

        With this statement, the European Commission wanted to clear the field of doubt, making explicit that intermediation service providers (such as online platforms) qualify as suppliers (as opposed to commercial agents) under the VBER. This reflects the approach of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 (“P2B Regulation”), which has, for the first time, dictated a specific discipline for digital platforms. It provided for a set of rules to create a “fair, transparent, and predictable environment” for smaller businesses and customers” and for the rationale of the Digital Markets Act, banning certain practices used by large platforms acting as “gatekeepers”.

        Therefore, all contracts concluded between manufacturers and platforms (defined as ‘providers of online intermediation services’) are subject to all the restrictions imposed by the VBER. These include the price, the territories to which or the customers to whom the intermediated goods or services may be sold, or the restrictions relating to online advertising and selling.

        Thus, to give an example, the operator of a platform may not impose a fixed or minimum sale price for a transaction promoted through the platform.

        The second most impactful aspect concerns hybrid platforms, i.e., competing in the relevant market to sell intermediated goods or services. Amazon is the most well-known example, as it is a provider of intermediation services (“Amazon Marketplace”), and – at the same time – it distributes the products of those parties (“Amazon Retail”). We have previously explored the distinction between those 2 business models (and the consequences in terms of intellectual property infringement) here.

        The new VBER explicitly does not apply to hybrid platforms. Therefore, the agreements concluded among such platforms and manufacturers are subject to the limitations of the TFEU, as such providers may have the incentive to favour their sales and the ability to influence the outcome of competition between undertakings that use their online intermediation services.

        Those agreements must be assessed individually under Article 101 of the TFEU, as they do not necessarily restrict competition within the meaning of TFEU, or they may fulfil the conditions of an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

        The third very relevant aspect concerns the parity obligations (also referred to as Most Favoured Nation Clauses, or MFNs), i.e., the contract provisions in which a seller (directly or indirectly) agrees to give the buyer the best terms it makes available to any other buyer.

        Indeed, platforms’ contractual terms often contain parity obligation clauses to prevent users from offering their products/services at lower prices or on better conditions on their websites or other platforms.

        The new VBER deals explicitly with parity clauses, making a distinction between clauses whose purpose is to prohibit users of a platform from selling goods or services on more favourable terms through competing platforms (so-called “wide parity clauses”), and clauses that prohibit sales on more favourable terms only in respect of channels operated directly by the users (so-called “narrow parity clauses”).

        Wide parity clauses do not benefit from the VBER exemption; therefore, such obligations must be assessed individually under Article 101(3) TFEU.

        On the other hand, narrow parity clauses continue to benefit from the exemption already granted by the old VBER if they do not exceed the threshold of 30% of the relevant market share set out in Article 3 of the new VBER. However, the new Guidelines warn against using overly narrow parity obligations by online platforms covering a significant share of users, stating that if there is no evidence of pro-competitive effects, the benefit of the block exemption is likely to be withdrawn.

        Impact and takeaways

        The new VBER entered into force on 1 June 2022 and is already applicable to agreements signed after that date. Agreements already in force on 31 May 2022 that satisfy the conditions for exemption under the current VBER but do not satisfy the requirements under the new VBER shall benefit from a one-year transitional period.

        The new regime will be the playing field for all platform-driven sales over the next 12 years (the regulation expires on 31 May 2034). Currently, the rather restrictive novelties on hybrid platforms and parity obligations will likely necessitate substantial revisions to existing trade agreements.

        Here, then, are some tips for managing contracts and relationships with online platforms:

        • the new VBER is the right opportunity to review the existing distribution networks. The revision will have to consider not only the new regulatory limits (e.g., the ban on wide parity clauses) but also the new discipline reserved for hybrid platforms and dual distribution to coordinate the different distribution channels as efficiently as possible, by the stakes set by the new VBER and the Guidelines;
        • platforms are likely to play an even greater role during the next decade; it is, therefore, essential to consider these sales channels from the outset, coordinating them with the other existing ones (retail, direct sales, distributors, etc.) to avoid jeopardizing the marketing of products or services;
        • the European legislator’s attention toward platforms is growing. Looking up from the VBER, one should not forget that they are subject to a multitude of other European regulations, which are gradually regulating the sector and which must be considered when concluding contracts with platforms. The reference is not only to the recent Digital Market Act and P2B Regulation but also to the protection of IP rights on platforms, which – as we have already seen – is still an open issue.

        Summary

        To avoid disputes with important suppliers, it is advisable to plan purchases over the medium and long term and not operate solely on the basis of orders and order confirmations. Planning makes it possible to agree on the duration of the ‘supply agreement, minimum volumes of products to be delivered and delivery schedules, prices, and the conditions under which prices can be varied over time.
        The use of a framework purchase agreement can help avoid future uncertainties and allows various options to be used to manage commodity price fluctuations depending on the type of products , such as automatic price indexing or agreement to renegotiate in the event of commodity fluctuations beyond a certain set tolerance period.

        I read in a press release: “These days, the glass industry is sending wine companies new unilateral contract amendments with price changes of 20%…”

        What can one do to avoid the imposition of price increases by suppliers? 

        • Know your rights and act in an informed manner
        • Plan and organise your supply chain

        Does my supplier have the right to increase prices?

        If contracts have already been concluded, e.g., orders have already been confirmed by the supplier, the answer is often no.

        It is not legitimate to request a price change. It is much less legitimate to communicate it unilaterally, with the threat of cancelling the order or not delivering the goods if the request is not granted.

        What if he tells me it is force majeure?

        That’s wrong: increased costs are not a force majeure but rather an unforeseen excessive onerousness, which hardly happens.

        What if the supplier canceled the order, unilaterally increased the price, or did not deliver the goods?

        He would be in breach of contract and liable to pay damages for violating his contractual obligations.

        How can one avoid a tug-of-war with suppliers?

        The tools are there. You have to know them and use them.

        It is necessary to plan purchases in the medium term, agreeing with suppliers on a schedule in which are set out:

        • the quantities of products to be ordered
        • the delivery terms
        • the durationof the agreement
        • the pricesof the products or raw materials
        • the conditions under which prices can be varied

        There is a very effective instrument to do so: a framework purchase agreement.

        Using a framework purchase agreement, the parties negotiate the above elements, which will be valid for the agreed period.

        Once the agreement is concluded, product orders will follow, governed by the framework agreement, without the need to renegotiate the content of individual deliveries each time.

        For an in-depth discussion of this contract, see this article.

        • “Yes, but my suppliers will never sign it!”

        Why not? Ask them to explain the reason.

        This type of agreement is in the interest of both parties. It allows planning future orders and grants certainty as to whether, when, and how much the parties can change the price.

        In contrast, acting without written agreements forces the parties to operate in an environment of uncertainty. Suppliers can request price increases from one day to the next and refuse supply if the changes are not accepted.

        How are price changes for future supplies regulated?

        Depending on the type of products or services and the raw materials or energy relevant in determining the final price, there are several possibilities.

        • The first option is to index the price automatically. E.g., if the cost of a barrel of Brent oil increases/decreases by 10%, the party concerned is entitled to request a corresponding adjustment of the product’s price in all orders placed as of the following week.
        • An alternative is to provide for a price renegotiation in the event of a fluctuation of the reference commodity. E.g., suppose the LME Aluminium index of the London Stock Exchange increases above a certain threshold. In that case, the interested party may request a price renegotiationfor orders in the period following the increase.

        What if the parties do not agree on new prices?

        It is possible to terminate the contract or refer the price determination to a third party, who would act as arbitrator and set the new prices for future orders.

        Summary

        The framework supply contract is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier) that take place over a certain period of time. This agreement determines the main elements of future contracts such as price, product volumes, delivery terms, technical or quality specifications, and the duration of the agreement.

        The framework contract is useful for ensuring continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a certain product that is essential for planning industrial or commercial activity. While the general terms and conditions of purchase or sale are the rules that apply to all suppliers or customers of the company. The framework contract is advisable to be concluded with essential suppliers for the continuity of business activity, in general or in relation to a particular project.

        What I am talking about in this article:

        • What is the supply framework agreement?
        • What is the function of the supply framework agreement?
        • The difference with the general conditions of sale or purchase
        • When to enter a purchase framework agreement?
        • When is it beneficial to conclude a sales framework agreement?
        • The content of the supply framework agreement
        • Price revision clause and hardship
        • Delivery terms in the supply framework agreement
        • The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts
        • International sales: applicable law and dispute resolution arrangements

        What is a framework supply agreement?

        It is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier), which will take place over a certain period.

        It is therefore referred to as a “framework agreement” because it is an agreement that establishes the rules of a future series of sales and purchase contracts, determining their primary elements (such as the price, the volumes of products to be sold and purchased, the delivery terms of the products, and the duration of the contract).

        After concluding the framework agreement, the parties will exchange orders and order confirmations, entering a series of autonomous sales contracts without re-discussing the covenants already defined in the framework agreement.

        Depending on one’s point of view, this agreement is also called a sales framework agreement (if the seller/supplier uses it) or a purchasing framework agreement (if the customer proposes it).

        What is the function of the framework supply agreement?

        It is helpful to arrange a framework agreement in all cases where the parties intend to proceed with a series of purchases/sales of products over time and are interested in giving stability to the commercial agreement by determining its main elements.

        In particular, the purchase framework agreement may be helpful to a company that wishes to ensure continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a specific product that is essential for planning its industrial or commercial activity (raw material, semi-finished product, component).

        By concluding the framework agreement, the company can obtain, for example, a commitment from the supplier to supply a particular minimum volume of products, at a specific price, with agreed terms and technical specifications, for a certain period.

        This agreement is also beneficial, at the same time, to the seller/supplier, which can plan sales for that period and organize, in turn, the supply chain that enables it to procure the raw materials and components necessary to produce the products.

        What is the difference between a purchase or sales framework agreement and the general terms and conditions?

        Whereas the framework agreement is an agreement that is used with one or more suppliers for a specific product and a certain time frame, determining the essential elements of future contracts, the general purchase (or sales) conditions are the rules that apply to all the company’s suppliers (or customers).

        The first agreement, therefore, is negotiated and defined on a case-by-case basis. At the same time, the general conditions are prepared unilaterally by the company, and the customers or suppliers (depending on whether they are sales or purchase conditions) adhere to and accept that the general conditions apply to the individual order and/or future contracts.

        The two agreements might also co-exist: in that case; it is a good idea to specify which contract should prevail in the event of a discrepancy between the different provisions (usually, this hierarchy is envisaged, ranging from the special to the general: order – order confirmation; framework agreement; general terms and conditions of purchase).

        When is it important to conclude a purchase framework agreement?

        It is beneficial to conclude this agreement when dealing with a mono-supplier or a supplier that would be very difficult to replace if it stopped selling products to the purchasing company.

        The risks one aims to avoid or diminish are so-called stock-outs, i.e., supply interruptions due to the supplier’s lack of availability of products or because the products are available, but the parties cannot agree on the delivery time or sales price.

        Another result that can be achieved is to bind a strategic supplier for a certain period by agreeing that it will reserve an agreed share of production for the buyer on predetermined terms and conditions and avoid competition with offers from third parties interested in the products for the duration of the agreement.

        When is it helpful to conclude a sales framework agreement?

        This agreement allows the seller/supplier to plan sales to a particular customer and thus to plan and organize its production and logistical capacity for the agreed period, avoiding extra costs or delays.

        Planning sales also makes it possible to correctly manage financial obligations and cash flows with a medium-term vision, harmonizing commitments and investments with the sales to one’s customers.

        What is the content of the supply framework agreement?

        There is no standard model of this agreement, which originated from business practice to meet the requirements indicated above.

        Generally, the agreement provides for a fixed period (e.g., 12 months) in which the parties undertake to conclude a series of purchases and sales of products, determining the price and terms of supply and the main covenants of future sales contracts.

        The most important clauses are:

        • the identification of products and technical specifications (often identified in an annex)
        • the minimum/maximum volume of supplies
        • the possible obligation to purchase/sell a minimum/maximum volume of products
        • the schedule of supplies
        • the delivery times
        • the determination of the price and the conditions for its possible modification (see also the next paragraph)
        • impediments to performance (Force Majeure)
        • cases of Hardship
        • penalties for delay or non-performance or for failure to achieve the agreed volumes
        • the hierarchy between the framework agreement and the orders and any other contracts between the parties
        • applicable law and dispute resolution (especially in international agreements)

        How to handle price revision in a supply contract?

        A crucial clause, especially in times of strong fluctuations in the prices of raw materials, transport, and energy, is the price revision clause.

        In the absence of an agreement on this issue, the parties bear the risk of a price increase by undertaking to respect the conditions initially agreed upon; except in exceptional cases (where the fluctuation is strong, affects a short period, and is caused by unforeseeable events), it isn’t straightforward to invoke the supervening excessive onerousness, which allows renegotiating the price, or the contract to be terminated.

        To avoid the uncertainty generated by price fluctuations, it is advisable to agree in the contract on the mechanisms for revising the price (e.g., automatic indexing following the quotation of raw materials). The so-called Hardship or Excessive Onerousness clause establishes what price fluctuation limits are accepted by the parties and what happens if the variations go beyond these limits, providing for the obligation to renegotiate the price or the termination of the contract if no agreement is reached within a certain period.

        How to manage delivery terms in a supply agreement?

        Another fundamental pact in a medium to long-term supply relationship concerns delivery terms. In this case, it is necessary to reconcile the purchaser’s interest in respecting the agreed dates with the supplier’s interest in avoiding claims for damages in the event of a delay, especially in the case of sales requiring intercontinental transport.

        The first thing to be clarified in this regard concerns the nature of delivery deadlines: are they essential or indicative? In the first case, the party affected has the right to terminate (i.e., wind up) the agreement in the event of non-compliance with the term; in the second case, due diligence, information, and timely notification of delays may be required, whereas termination is not a remedy that may be automatically invoked in the event of a delay.

        A useful instrument in this regard is the penalty clause: with this covenant, it is established that for each day/week/month of delay, a sum of money is due by way of damages in favor of the party harmed by the delay.

        If quantified correctly and not excessively, the penalty is helpful for both parties because it makes it possible to predict the damages that may be claimed for the delay, quantifying them in a fair and determined sum. Consequently, the seller is not exposed to claims for damages related to factors beyond his control. At the same time, the buyer can easily calculate the compensation for the delay without the need for further proof.

        The same mechanism, among other things, may be adopted to govern the buyer’s delay in accepting delivery of the goods.

        Finally, it is a good idea to specify the limit of the penalty (e.g.,10 percent of the price of the goods) and a maximum period of grace for the delay, beyond which the party concerned is entitled to terminate the contract by retaining the penalty.

        The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts

        A situation that is often confused with excessive onerousness, but is, in fact, quite different, is that of Force Majeure, i.e., the supervening impossibility of performance of the contractual obligation due to any event beyond the reasonable control of the party affected, which could not have been reasonably foreseen and the effects of which cannot be overcome by reasonable efforts.

        The function of this clause is to set forth clearly when the parties consider that Force Majeure may be invoked, what specific events are included (e.g., a lock-down of the production plant by order of the authority), and what are the consequences for the parties’ obligations (e.g., suspension of the obligation for a certain period, as long as the cause of impossibility of performance lasts, after which the party affected by performance may declare its intention to dissolve the contract).

        If the wording of this clause is general (as is often the case), the risk is that it will be of little use; it is also advisable to check that the regulation of force majeure complies with the law applicable to the contract (here an in-depth analysis indicating the regime provided for by 42 national laws).

        Applicable law and dispute resolution clauses

        Suppose the customer or supplier is based abroad. In that case, several significant differences must be borne in mind: the first is the agreement’s language, which must be intelligible to the foreign party, therefore usually in English or another language familiar to the parties, possibly also in two languages with parallel text.

        The second issue concerns the applicable law, which should be expressly indicated in the agreement. This subject matter is vast, and here we can say that the decision on the applicable law must be made on a case-by-case basis, intentionally: in fact, it is not always convenient to recall the application of the law of one’s own country.

        In most international sales contracts, the 1980 Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”) applies, a uniform law that is balanced, clear, and easy to understand. Therefore, it is not advisable to exclude it.

        Finally, in a supply framework agreement with an international supplier, it is important to identify the method of dispute resolution: no solution fits all. Choosing a country’s jurisdiction is not always the right decision (indeed, it can often prove counterproductive).

        Roberto Luzi Crivellini

        业务领域

        • 仲裁
        • 分销协议
        • 国际贸易
        • 诉讼
        • 房地产
        联系方式 Roberto

        写信给 Roberto





          阅读 Legalmondo 的隐私政策
          This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

          The Supply Framework Agreement

          2023年3月20日

          • 契约
          • 分销协议
          • 国际贸易

          When selling health-related products, the question frequently arises as to which product category, and therefore which regulatory regime, they fall under. This question often arises when distinguishing between food supplements and medicinal products. But in other constellations, too, difficult questions of demarcation arise, which must be answered with a view to legally compliant marketing.

          In a highly interesting case, the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) of Düsseldorf, Germany, recently had to classify a CBD-containing (Cannabidiol) mouth spray that was explicitly advertised by its manufacturer as a “cosmetic” and therefore not suitable for human consumption. The Ingredients of the product were labelled: « Cannabis sativa seed oil, cannabidiol from cannabis extract, tincture or resin, cannabis sativa leaf extract ».

          The Product is additionally also labelled as follows: “Cosmetic oral care spray with hemp leaf extract. » The Instructions for use are: « Spray a maximum of 3 sprays a day into the mouth as desired. Spit out after 30 seconds and do not swallow. »

          A spray of the Product contains 10 mg CBD. This results in a maximum daily dose of 30 mg CBD as specified by the company.

          At the same time, however, it was pointed out that the “consumption” of a spray shot was harmless to health.

          The mouth spray could therefore be consumed like a food, but was declared as a “cosmetic”. This is precisely where the court had to examine whether the prohibition order based on food law was lawful.

          For the definition of cosmetic products Article 2 sentence 4 lit. e) Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 refers to Directive 76/768/EEC. This was replaced by Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009. Cosmetic products are defined in Article 2(1)(a) as follows: “‘cosmetic product’ means any substance or mixture intended to be placed in contact with the external parts of the human body (epidermis, hair system, nails, lips and external genital organs) or with the teeth and the mucous membranes of the oral cavity with a view exclusively or mainly to cleaning them, perfuming them, changing their appearance, protecting them, keeping them in good condition or correcting body odours ”.

          Here too, it is not the composition of the product that is decisive, but its intended purpose, which is to be determined on the basis of objective criteria according to general public opinion based on concrete evidence.

          According to the system of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002, Article 2 sentence 1 first defines foodstuffs in general and then excludes cosmetic products under sentence 4 lit. e). According to the definition in Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009, cosmetic products must have an exclusive or at least predominant cosmetic purpose. It can be concluded from this system that the exclusivity or predominance must be positively established. If it is not possible to determine which purpose predominates, the product is a foodstuff.

          The Düsseldorf Administrative Court had to deal with this question in the aforementioned legal dispute brought by the distributor against an official prohibition order in the form of a so-called general ruling („Allgemeinverfügung“). By notice dated July 11, 2020, the competent authority issued a general ruling prohibiting the marketing of foodstuffs containing “cannabidiol (as ‘CBD isolates’ or ‘hemp extracts enriched with CBD’)” in their urban area. The company, based in this city, offered the mouth spray described above.

          In a ruling dated 25.10.2024 (Courts Ref. : 26 K 2072/23), the court dismissed the company’s claim. The court’s main arguments were :

          1. Classification as food: the CBD spray was correctly classified as food by the authority, as it was reasonable to expect that it could be swallowed despite indications to the contrary. According to an objective perception of the market, there is a now established expectation of an average informed, attentive and reasonable consumer to the effect that CBD oils are intended as “lifestyle” products for oral ingestion, from which consumers hope for positive health effects The labelling as “cosmetic” was refuted by the objective consumer expectations and the nature of the application.
          2. No medicinal product status: Due to the low dosage in this case (max. 30 mg CBD per day), the product was not classified as a functional medicinal product, as there was no sufficiently proven pharmacological effect.
          3. Legal basis of the injunction: The prohibition of the sale of the products by the defendant was based on a general order, which was confirmed as lawful by the court.

          In the ruling, the court emphasizes the objective consumer expectation and clarifies that products cannot be exempted from a different regulatory classification by the authorities or the courts solely by their labelling.

          Conclusion: The decision presented underlines the considerable importance of the “correct” classification of a health product in the respective legal product category. In addition to the classic distinction between foodstuffs (food supplements) and medicinal products, comparable issues also arise with other product types. In this case in the constellation of cosmetics versus food – combined with the special legal component of the use of CBD.

          The author of this article is Matthias Hesshaus

          Commercial agents have specific regulations with rights and obligations that are “mandatory”: those who sign an agency contract cannot derogate from them. Answering whether an influencer can be an agent is essential because, if he or she is an agent, the agent regulations will apply to him or her.

          Let’s take it one step at a time. The influencer we will talk about is the person who, with their actions and comments (blogs, social media accounts, videos, events, or a bit of everything), talks to their followers about the advantages of certain products or services identified with a certain third-party brand. In exchange for this, the influencer is paid.[1]

          A commercial agent is someone who promotes the contracting of others’ products or services, does so in a stable way, and gets paid in return. He or she can also conclude the contract, but this is not essential.

          The law imposes certain obligations and guarantees rights to those signing an agency contract. If the influencer is considered an “agent”, he or she should also have them. And there are several of them: for example, the duration, the notice to be given to terminate the contract, the obligations of the parties… And the most relevant, the right of the agent to receive compensation at the end of the relationship for the clientele that has been generated. If an influencer is an agent, he would also have this right.

          How can an influencer be assessed as an agent? For that we must analyse two things: (a) the contract (and be careful because there is a contract, even if it is not written) and (b) how the parties have behaved.

          The elements that, in my opinion, are most relevant to conclude that an influencer is an agent would be the following:

           

          a) the influencer promotes the contracting of services or the purchase of products and does so independently.

          The contract will indicate what the influencer must do. It will be clearer to consider him as an agent if his comments encourage contracting: for example, if they include a link to the manufacturer’s website, if he offers a discount code, if he allows orders to be placed with him. And if he does so as an independent “professional”, and not as an employee (with a timetable, means, instructions).

          It may be more difficult to consider him as an agent if he limits himself to talking about the benefits of the product or service, appearing in advertising as a brand image, and using a certain product, and speaking well of it. The important thing, in my opinion, is to examine whether the influencer’s activity is aimed at getting people to buy the product he or she is talking about, or whether what he or she is doing is more generic persuasion (appearing in advertising, lending his or her image to a product, carrying out demonstrations of its use), or even whether he or she is only seeking to promote himself or herself as a vehicle for general information (for example, influencers who make comparisons of products without trying to get people to buy one or the other). In the first case (trying to get people to buy the product) it would be easier to consider it as an “agent”, and less so in the other examples.

           

          b) this “promotion” is done in a continuous or stable manner.

          Be careful because this continuity or stability does not mean that the contract has to be of indefinite duration. Rather, it is the opposite of a sporadic relationship. A one-year contract may be sufficient, while several unconnected interventions, even if they last longer, may not be sufficient.

          In this case, influencers who make occasional comments, who intervene with isolated actions, who limit themselves to making comparisons without promoting the purchase of one or the other, and even if all this leads to sales, even if their comments are frequent and even if they can have a great influence on the behavior of their followers, would be excluded as agents.

           

          c) they receive remuneration for their activity.

          An influencer who is remunerated based on sales (e.g., by promoting a discount code, a specific link, or referring to your website for orders) can more easily be considered as an agent. But also, if he or she only receives a fixed amount for their promotion. On the other hand, influencers who do not receive any remuneration from the brand (e.g. someone who talks about the benefits of a product in comparison with others, but without linking it to its promotion) would be excluded.

           

          Conclusion

          The borderline between what qualifies an influencer as an agent and what does not can be very thin, especially because contracts are often not unambiguous and sometimes their services are multiple. The most important thing is to carefully analyse the contract and the parties’ behaviour.

          An influencer could be considered a commercial agent to the extent that his or her activity promotes the contracting of the product (not simply if he or she carries out informative or image work), that it is done on a stable basis (and not merely anecdotal or sporadic) and in exchange for remuneration.

          To assess the specific situation, it is essential to analyse the contract (if it is written, this is easier) and the parties’ behaviour.

          In short, to draw up a contract with an influencer or, if it has already been signed, but you want to conclude it, you will have to pay attention to these elements. As an influencer you may have a strong interest in being considered an agent at the end of the contract and thus be entitled to compensation, while as employer you will prefer the opposite.

          FINAL NOTE. In Spain and at the date of this comment (9 June 2024) I am not aware of any judgement dealing with this issue. My proposal is based on my experience of more than 30 years advising and litigating on agency contracts. On the other hand, and as far as I know, there is at least one judgment in Rome (Italy) dealing with the matter: Tribunale di Roma; Sezione Lavoro 4º, St. 2615 of 4 March 2024; R. G. n. 38445/2022.

          The commercial agent has the right to obtain certain information about the sales of the principal. The Spanish Law on Agency Contracts provides (15.2 LCA) that the agent has the right to demand to see the accounts of the principal in order to verify all matters relating to the commissions due to him. And also, to be provided with the information available to the principal and necessary to verify the amount of such commissions.

          This article is in line with the 1986 Commercial Agents Directive, according to which (12.3) the agent is entitled to demand to be provided with all information at the disposal of the principal, particularly an extract from the books of account, which is necessary to verify the amount of commission due to the agent. This may not be altered to the detriment of the commercial agent by agreement.

          The question is, does this right remain even after the termination of the agency contract? In other words: once the agency contract is terminated, can the agent request the information and documentation mentioned in these articles and is the Principal obliged to provide it?

          In our opinion, the rule does not say anything that limits this right, rather the opposite is to be expected. Therefore, to the extent that there is still any possible commission that may arise from such verification, the answer must be yes. Let us see.

          The right to demand the production of accounts exists so that the agent can verify the amount of commissions. And the agent is entitled to commissions for acts and operations concluded during the term of the contract (art. 12 LCA), but also for acts or operations concluded after the termination of the contract (art. 13 LCA), and for operations not carried out due to circumstances attributable to the principal (art. 17 LCA). In addition, the agent is entitled to have the commission accrued at the time when the act or transaction should have been executed (art. 14 LCA).

          All these transactions can take place after the conclusion of the contract. Consider the usual situation where orders are placed during the contract but are accepted or executed afterwards. To reduce the agent’s right to be informed only during the term of the contract would be to limit his entitlement to the corresponding commission unduly. And it should be borne in mind that the amount of the commissions during the last five years may also influence the calculation of the client (goodwill) indemnity (art. 28 LCA), so that the agent’s interest in knowing them is twofold: what he would receive as commission, and what could increase the basis for future indemnity.

          This has been confirmed, for example, by the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) of Madrid (AAP 227/2017, of 29 June [ECLI:ES:APM:2017:2873A]) which textually states:

          […] art. 15.2 of the Agency Contract Act provides for the right of the agent to demand the exhibition of the Principal’s accounts in the particulars necessary to verify everything relating to the commissions corresponding to him, as well as to be provided with the information available to the Principal and necessary to verify the amount. This does not prevent, […], the agency contract having already been terminated, as this does not imply that commissions would cease to accrue for policies, contracted with the mediation of the agent, which remain in force.

          The question then arises as to whether this right to information is unlimited in time. And here the answer would be in the negative. The limitation of the right to receive information would be linked to the statute of limitations of the right to claim the corresponding commission. If the right to receive the commission were undoubtedly time-barred, it could be argued that it would not be possible to receive information about it. But for such an exception, the statute of limitations must be clear, therefore, taking into account possible interruptions due to claims, even extrajudicial ones. In case of doubt, it will be necessary to recognise the right to demand the information, without prejudice to later invoking and recognising the impossibility of claiming the commission if the right is time-barred. And for this we must consider the limitation period for claiming commissions (in general, three years) and that of the right to claim compensation for clientele (one year).

          In short: it does not seem that the right to receive information and to examine the principal’s documentation is limited by the term of the agency contract; although, on the other hand, it would be appropriate to analyse the possible limitation period for claiming commissions. In the absence of a clear answer to this question, the right to information should, in our opinion, prevail, without prejudice to the fact that the result may not entitle the claim because it is time-barred.

          SUMMARY: In large-scale events such as the Paris Olympics certain companies will attempt to “wildly” associate their brand with the event through a practice called “ambush marketing”, defined by caselaw as “an advertising strategy implemented by a company in order to associate its commercial image with that of an event, and thus to benefit from the media impact of said event, without paying the related rights and without first obtaining the event organizer’s authorization” (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912). A risky and punishable practice, that might sometimes yet be an option yet.

          Key takeaways

          • Ambush marketing might be a punished practice but is not prohibited as such;
          • As a counterpart of their investment, sponsors and official partners benefit from an extensive legal protection against all forms of ambush marketing in the event concerned, through various general texts (counterfeiting, parasitism, intellectual property) or more specific ones (e.g. sport law);
          • The Olympics Games are subject to specific regulations that further strengthen this protection, particularly in terms of intellectual property.
          • But these rights are not absolute, and they are still thin opportunities for astute ambush marketing.

          The protection offered to sponsors and official partners of sporting and cultural events from ambush marketing

          With a budget of over 4 billion euros, the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games are financed mostly by various official partners and sponsors, who in return benefit from a right to use Olympic and Paralympic properties to be able to associate their own brand image and distinctive signs with these events.

          Ambush marketing is not punishable as such under French law, but several scattered texts provide extensive protection against ambush marketing for sponsors and partners of sporting or cultural continental-wide or world-wide events. Indeed, sponsors are legitimately entitled to peacefully enjoy the rights offered to them in return for large-scale investments in events such as the FIFA or rugby World Cups, or the Olympic Games.

          In particular, official sponsors and organizers of such events may invoke:

          • the “classic” protections offered by intellectual property law (trademark law and copyright) in the context of infringement actions based on the French Intellectual Property Code,
          • tort law (parasitism and unfair competition based on article 1240 of the French Civil Code);
          • consumer law (misleading commercial practices) based on the French Consumer Code,
          • but also more specific texts such as the protection of the exploitation rights of sports federations and sports event organizers derived from the events or competitions they organize, as set out in article L.333-1 of the French Sports Code, which gives sports event organizers an exploitation monopoly.

          The following ambush marketing practices were sanctioned on the abovementioned grounds:

          • The use of a tennis competition name and of the trademark associated with it during the sporting event: The organization of online bets, by an online betting operator, on the Roland Garros tournament, using the protected sign and trademark Roland Garros to target the matches on which the bets were organized. The unlawful exploitation of the sporting event, was punished and 400 K€ were allowed as damages, based on article L. 333-1 of the French Sports Code, since only the French Tennis Federation (F.F.T.) owns the right to exploit Roland Garros. The use of the trademark was also punished as counterfeiting (with 300 K€ damages) and parasitism (with 500 K€ damages) (Paris Court of Appeal, Oct. 14, 2009, Case No 08/19179);
          • An advertising campaign taking place during a film festival and reproducing the event’s trademark: The organization, during the Cannes Film Festival, of a digital advertising campaign by a cosmetics brand through the publication on its social networks of videos showing the beauty makeovers of the brand’s muses, in some of which the official poster of the Cannes Film Festival was visible, one of which reproduced the registered trademark of the “Palme d’Or”, was punished on the grounds of copyright infringement and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Judicial Court, Dec. 11, 2020, Case No19/08543);
          • An advertising campaign aimed at falsely claiming to be an official partner of an event: The use, during the Cannes Film Festival, of the slogan “official hairdresser for women” together with the expressions “Cannes” and “Cannes Festival”, and other publications falsely leading the public to believe that the hairdresser was an official partner, to the detriment of the only official hairdresser of the Cannes festival, was punished on the grounds of unfair competition and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912).

          These financial penalties may be combined with injunctions to cease these behaviors, and/or publication in the press under penalty.

          An even greater protection for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games

          The Paris 2024 Olympic Games are also subject to specific regulations.

          Firstly, Article L.141-5 of the French Sports Code, enacted for the benefit of the “Comité national olympique et sportif français” (CNOSF) and the “Comité de l’organisation des Jeux Olympiques et Paralympiques de Paris 2024” (COJOP), protects Olympic signs such as the national Olympic emblems, but also the emblems, the flag, motto and Olympic symbol, Olympic anthem, logo, mascot, slogan and posters of the Olympic Games, the year of the Olympic Games “city + year”, the terms “Jeux Olympiques”, “Olympisme”, “Olympiade”, “JO”, “olympique”, “olympien” and “olympienne”. Under no circumstances may these signs be reproduced or even imitated by third-party companies. The COJOP has also published a guide to the protection of the Olympic trademark, outlining the protected symbols, trademarks and signs, as well as the protection of the official partners of the Olympic Games.

          Secondly, Law no. 2018-202 of March 26, 2018 on the organization of the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games adds even more specific prohibitions, such as the reservation for official sponsors of advertising space located near Olympic venues, or located on the Olympic and Paralympic torch route. This protection is unique in the context of the Olympic Games, but usually unregulated in the context of simple sporting events.

          The following practices, for example, have already been sanctioned on the above-mentioned grounds:

          • Reproduction of a logo imitating the well-known “Olympic” trademark on a clothing collection: The marketing of a collection of clothing, during the 2016 Olympic Games, bearing a logo (five hearts in the colors of the 5 Olympic colors intersecting in the image of the Olympic logo) imitating the Olympic symbol in association with the words “RIO” and “RIO 2016”, was punished on the grounds of parasitism (10 K€ damages) and articles L. 141-5 of the French Sports Code (35 K€) and L. 713-1 of the French Intellectual Property Code (10 K€ damages) (Paris Judicial Court, June 7, 2018, Case No16/10605);
          • The organization of a contest on social networks using protected symbols: During the 2018 Olympic Games in PyeongChang, a car rental company organized an online game inviting Internet users to nominate the athletes they wanted to win a clock radio, associated with the hashtags “#JO2018” (“#OJ2018”), “#Jeuxolympiques” (“#Olympicsgame”) or “C’est parti pour les jeux Olympiques” (“let’s go for the Olympic Games”) without authorization from the CNOSF, owner of these distinctive signs under the 2018 law and article L.141-5 of the French Sport Code and punished on these grounds with 20 K€ damages and of 10 K€ damages for parasitism (Paris Judicial Court, May 29, 2020, n°18/14115).

          These regulations offer official partners greater protection for their investments against ambush marketing practices from non-official sponsors.

          Some marketing operations might be exempted

          An analysis of case law and promotional practices nonetheless reveals the contours of certain advertising practices that could be authorized (i.e. not sanctioned by the above-mentioned texts), provided they are skillfully prepared and presented. Here are a few exemples :

          • Communication of information for advertising purposes: The use of the results of a rugby match and the announcement of a forthcoming match in a newspaper to promote a motor vehicle and its distinctive features was deemed lawful: “France 13 Angleterre 24 – the Fiat 500 congratulates England on its victory and looks forward to seeing the French team on March 9 for France-Italy” (France 13 Angleterre 24 – la Fiat 500 félicite l’Angleterre pour sa victoire et donne rendez-vous à l’équipe de France le 9 mars pour France-Italie) the judges having considered that this publication “merely reproduces a current sporting result, acquired and made public on the front page of the sports newspaper, and refers to a future match also known as already announced by the newspaper in a news article” (Court of cassation, May 20, 2014, Case No 13-12.102).
          • Sponsorship of athletes, including those taking part in Olympic competitions: Subject to compliance with the applicable regulatory framework, particularly as regards models, any company may enter into partnerships with athletes taking part in the Olympic Games, for example by donating clothing bearing the desired logo or brand, which they could wear during their participation in the various events. Athletes may also, under certain conditions, broadcast acknowledgements from their partner (even if unofficial). Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter governs the use of athletes’, coaches’ and officials’ images for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.

          The combined legal and marketing approach to the conception and preparation of the message of such a communication operation is essential to avoid legal proceedings, particularly on the grounds of parasitism; one might therefore legitimately contemplate advertising campaigns, particularly clever, or even malicious ones.

          In this first episode of Legalmondo’s Distribution Talks series, I spoke with Ignacio Alonso, a Madrid-based lawyer with extensive experience in international commercial distribution.

          Main discussion points:

          • in Spain, there is no specific law for distribution agreements, which are governed by the general rules of the Commercial Code;
          • therefore, it is essential to draft a clear and comprehensive contract, which will be the primary source of the parties’ rights and obligations;
          • it is also good to be aware of Spanish case law on commercial distribution, which in some cases applies the law on commercial agency by analogy.
          • the most common issues involving foreign producers distributing in Spain arise at the time of termination of the relationship, mainly because case law grants the terminated distributor an indemnity of clientele or goodwill if similar prerequisites to those in the agency regulations apply.
          • another frequent dispute concerns the adequacy of the notice period for terminating the contract, especially if there is no agreement between the parties: the advice is to follow what the agency regulations stipulate and thus establish a minimum notice period of one month for each year of the contract’s duration, up to 6 months for agreements lasting more than five years;
          • regarding dispute resolution tools, mediation is an option that should be carefully considered because it is quick, inexpensive, and allows a shared solution to be sought flexibly without disrupting the business relationship.
          • if mediation fails, the parties can provide for recourse to arbitration or state court. The choice depends on the case’s specific circumstances, and one factor in favor of jurisdiction is the possibility of appeal, which is excluded in the case of arbitration.

          Go deeper

          Summary

          On 1 June 2022, Regulation EU n. 720/2022, i.e.: the new Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (hereinafter: “VBER”), replaced the previous version (Regulation EU n. 330/2010), expired on 31 May 2022.

          The new VBER and the new vertical guidelines (hereinafter: “Guidelines”) have received the main evidence gathered during the lifetime of the previous VBER and contain some relevant provisions affecting the discipline of all B2B agreements among businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain.

          In this article, we will focus on the impact of the new VBER on sales through digital platforms, listing the main novelties impacting distribution chains, including a platform for marketing products/services.

          The general discipline of vertical agreements

          Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibits all agreements that prevent, restrict, or distort competition within the EU market, listing the main types, e.g.: price fixing; market partitioning; limitations on production/development/investment; unfair terms, etc.

          However, Article 101(3) TFEU exempts from such restrictions the agreements that contribute to improving the EU market, to be identified in a special category Regulation.

          The VBER establishes the category of vertical agreements (i.e., agreements between businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain), determining which of these agreements are exempted from Article 101(1) TFEU prohibition.

          In short, vertical agreements are presumed to be exempted (and therefore valid) if they do not contain so-called “hardcore restrictions” (i.e., severe restrictions of competition, such as an absolute ban on sales in a territory or the manufacturer’s determination of the distributor’s resale price) and if neither party’s market share exceeds 30%.

          The exempted agreements benefit from what has been termed the “safe harbour” of the VBER. In contrast, the others will be subject to the general prohibition of Article 101(1) TFEU unless they can benefit from an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

          The innovations introduced by the new VBER to online platforms

          The first relevant aspect concerns the classification of the platforms, as the European Commission excluded that the online platform generally meets the conditions to be categorized as agency agreements.

          While there have never been doubts concerning platforms that operate by purchasing and reselling products (classic example: Amazon Retail), some have arisen concerning those platforms that merely promote the products of third parties without carrying out the activity of resale (classic example: Amazon Marketplace).

          With this statement, the European Commission wanted to clear the field of doubt, making explicit that intermediation service providers (such as online platforms) qualify as suppliers (as opposed to commercial agents) under the VBER. This reflects the approach of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 (“P2B Regulation”), which has, for the first time, dictated a specific discipline for digital platforms. It provided for a set of rules to create a “fair, transparent, and predictable environment” for smaller businesses and customers” and for the rationale of the Digital Markets Act, banning certain practices used by large platforms acting as “gatekeepers”.

          Therefore, all contracts concluded between manufacturers and platforms (defined as ‘providers of online intermediation services’) are subject to all the restrictions imposed by the VBER. These include the price, the territories to which or the customers to whom the intermediated goods or services may be sold, or the restrictions relating to online advertising and selling.

          Thus, to give an example, the operator of a platform may not impose a fixed or minimum sale price for a transaction promoted through the platform.

          The second most impactful aspect concerns hybrid platforms, i.e., competing in the relevant market to sell intermediated goods or services. Amazon is the most well-known example, as it is a provider of intermediation services (“Amazon Marketplace”), and – at the same time – it distributes the products of those parties (“Amazon Retail”). We have previously explored the distinction between those 2 business models (and the consequences in terms of intellectual property infringement) here.

          The new VBER explicitly does not apply to hybrid platforms. Therefore, the agreements concluded among such platforms and manufacturers are subject to the limitations of the TFEU, as such providers may have the incentive to favour their sales and the ability to influence the outcome of competition between undertakings that use their online intermediation services.

          Those agreements must be assessed individually under Article 101 of the TFEU, as they do not necessarily restrict competition within the meaning of TFEU, or they may fulfil the conditions of an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

          The third very relevant aspect concerns the parity obligations (also referred to as Most Favoured Nation Clauses, or MFNs), i.e., the contract provisions in which a seller (directly or indirectly) agrees to give the buyer the best terms it makes available to any other buyer.

          Indeed, platforms’ contractual terms often contain parity obligation clauses to prevent users from offering their products/services at lower prices or on better conditions on their websites or other platforms.

          The new VBER deals explicitly with parity clauses, making a distinction between clauses whose purpose is to prohibit users of a platform from selling goods or services on more favourable terms through competing platforms (so-called “wide parity clauses”), and clauses that prohibit sales on more favourable terms only in respect of channels operated directly by the users (so-called “narrow parity clauses”).

          Wide parity clauses do not benefit from the VBER exemption; therefore, such obligations must be assessed individually under Article 101(3) TFEU.

          On the other hand, narrow parity clauses continue to benefit from the exemption already granted by the old VBER if they do not exceed the threshold of 30% of the relevant market share set out in Article 3 of the new VBER. However, the new Guidelines warn against using overly narrow parity obligations by online platforms covering a significant share of users, stating that if there is no evidence of pro-competitive effects, the benefit of the block exemption is likely to be withdrawn.

          Impact and takeaways

          The new VBER entered into force on 1 June 2022 and is already applicable to agreements signed after that date. Agreements already in force on 31 May 2022 that satisfy the conditions for exemption under the current VBER but do not satisfy the requirements under the new VBER shall benefit from a one-year transitional period.

          The new regime will be the playing field for all platform-driven sales over the next 12 years (the regulation expires on 31 May 2034). Currently, the rather restrictive novelties on hybrid platforms and parity obligations will likely necessitate substantial revisions to existing trade agreements.

          Here, then, are some tips for managing contracts and relationships with online platforms:

          • the new VBER is the right opportunity to review the existing distribution networks. The revision will have to consider not only the new regulatory limits (e.g., the ban on wide parity clauses) but also the new discipline reserved for hybrid platforms and dual distribution to coordinate the different distribution channels as efficiently as possible, by the stakes set by the new VBER and the Guidelines;
          • platforms are likely to play an even greater role during the next decade; it is, therefore, essential to consider these sales channels from the outset, coordinating them with the other existing ones (retail, direct sales, distributors, etc.) to avoid jeopardizing the marketing of products or services;
          • the European legislator’s attention toward platforms is growing. Looking up from the VBER, one should not forget that they are subject to a multitude of other European regulations, which are gradually regulating the sector and which must be considered when concluding contracts with platforms. The reference is not only to the recent Digital Market Act and P2B Regulation but also to the protection of IP rights on platforms, which – as we have already seen – is still an open issue.

          Summary

          To avoid disputes with important suppliers, it is advisable to plan purchases over the medium and long term and not operate solely on the basis of orders and order confirmations. Planning makes it possible to agree on the duration of the ‘supply agreement, minimum volumes of products to be delivered and delivery schedules, prices, and the conditions under which prices can be varied over time.
          The use of a framework purchase agreement can help avoid future uncertainties and allows various options to be used to manage commodity price fluctuations depending on the type of products , such as automatic price indexing or agreement to renegotiate in the event of commodity fluctuations beyond a certain set tolerance period.

          I read in a press release: “These days, the glass industry is sending wine companies new unilateral contract amendments with price changes of 20%…”

          What can one do to avoid the imposition of price increases by suppliers? 

          • Know your rights and act in an informed manner
          • Plan and organise your supply chain

          Does my supplier have the right to increase prices?

          If contracts have already been concluded, e.g., orders have already been confirmed by the supplier, the answer is often no.

          It is not legitimate to request a price change. It is much less legitimate to communicate it unilaterally, with the threat of cancelling the order or not delivering the goods if the request is not granted.

          What if he tells me it is force majeure?

          That’s wrong: increased costs are not a force majeure but rather an unforeseen excessive onerousness, which hardly happens.

          What if the supplier canceled the order, unilaterally increased the price, or did not deliver the goods?

          He would be in breach of contract and liable to pay damages for violating his contractual obligations.

          How can one avoid a tug-of-war with suppliers?

          The tools are there. You have to know them and use them.

          It is necessary to plan purchases in the medium term, agreeing with suppliers on a schedule in which are set out:

          • the quantities of products to be ordered
          • the delivery terms
          • the durationof the agreement
          • the pricesof the products or raw materials
          • the conditions under which prices can be varied

          There is a very effective instrument to do so: a framework purchase agreement.

          Using a framework purchase agreement, the parties negotiate the above elements, which will be valid for the agreed period.

          Once the agreement is concluded, product orders will follow, governed by the framework agreement, without the need to renegotiate the content of individual deliveries each time.

          For an in-depth discussion of this contract, see this article.

          • “Yes, but my suppliers will never sign it!”

          Why not? Ask them to explain the reason.

          This type of agreement is in the interest of both parties. It allows planning future orders and grants certainty as to whether, when, and how much the parties can change the price.

          In contrast, acting without written agreements forces the parties to operate in an environment of uncertainty. Suppliers can request price increases from one day to the next and refuse supply if the changes are not accepted.

          How are price changes for future supplies regulated?

          Depending on the type of products or services and the raw materials or energy relevant in determining the final price, there are several possibilities.

          • The first option is to index the price automatically. E.g., if the cost of a barrel of Brent oil increases/decreases by 10%, the party concerned is entitled to request a corresponding adjustment of the product’s price in all orders placed as of the following week.
          • An alternative is to provide for a price renegotiation in the event of a fluctuation of the reference commodity. E.g., suppose the LME Aluminium index of the London Stock Exchange increases above a certain threshold. In that case, the interested party may request a price renegotiationfor orders in the period following the increase.

          What if the parties do not agree on new prices?

          It is possible to terminate the contract or refer the price determination to a third party, who would act as arbitrator and set the new prices for future orders.

          Summary

          The framework supply contract is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier) that take place over a certain period of time. This agreement determines the main elements of future contracts such as price, product volumes, delivery terms, technical or quality specifications, and the duration of the agreement.

          The framework contract is useful for ensuring continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a certain product that is essential for planning industrial or commercial activity. While the general terms and conditions of purchase or sale are the rules that apply to all suppliers or customers of the company. The framework contract is advisable to be concluded with essential suppliers for the continuity of business activity, in general or in relation to a particular project.

          What I am talking about in this article:

          • What is the supply framework agreement?
          • What is the function of the supply framework agreement?
          • The difference with the general conditions of sale or purchase
          • When to enter a purchase framework agreement?
          • When is it beneficial to conclude a sales framework agreement?
          • The content of the supply framework agreement
          • Price revision clause and hardship
          • Delivery terms in the supply framework agreement
          • The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts
          • International sales: applicable law and dispute resolution arrangements

          What is a framework supply agreement?

          It is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier), which will take place over a certain period.

          It is therefore referred to as a “framework agreement” because it is an agreement that establishes the rules of a future series of sales and purchase contracts, determining their primary elements (such as the price, the volumes of products to be sold and purchased, the delivery terms of the products, and the duration of the contract).

          After concluding the framework agreement, the parties will exchange orders and order confirmations, entering a series of autonomous sales contracts without re-discussing the covenants already defined in the framework agreement.

          Depending on one’s point of view, this agreement is also called a sales framework agreement (if the seller/supplier uses it) or a purchasing framework agreement (if the customer proposes it).

          What is the function of the framework supply agreement?

          It is helpful to arrange a framework agreement in all cases where the parties intend to proceed with a series of purchases/sales of products over time and are interested in giving stability to the commercial agreement by determining its main elements.

          In particular, the purchase framework agreement may be helpful to a company that wishes to ensure continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a specific product that is essential for planning its industrial or commercial activity (raw material, semi-finished product, component).

          By concluding the framework agreement, the company can obtain, for example, a commitment from the supplier to supply a particular minimum volume of products, at a specific price, with agreed terms and technical specifications, for a certain period.

          This agreement is also beneficial, at the same time, to the seller/supplier, which can plan sales for that period and organize, in turn, the supply chain that enables it to procure the raw materials and components necessary to produce the products.

          What is the difference between a purchase or sales framework agreement and the general terms and conditions?

          Whereas the framework agreement is an agreement that is used with one or more suppliers for a specific product and a certain time frame, determining the essential elements of future contracts, the general purchase (or sales) conditions are the rules that apply to all the company’s suppliers (or customers).

          The first agreement, therefore, is negotiated and defined on a case-by-case basis. At the same time, the general conditions are prepared unilaterally by the company, and the customers or suppliers (depending on whether they are sales or purchase conditions) adhere to and accept that the general conditions apply to the individual order and/or future contracts.

          The two agreements might also co-exist: in that case; it is a good idea to specify which contract should prevail in the event of a discrepancy between the different provisions (usually, this hierarchy is envisaged, ranging from the special to the general: order – order confirmation; framework agreement; general terms and conditions of purchase).

          When is it important to conclude a purchase framework agreement?

          It is beneficial to conclude this agreement when dealing with a mono-supplier or a supplier that would be very difficult to replace if it stopped selling products to the purchasing company.

          The risks one aims to avoid or diminish are so-called stock-outs, i.e., supply interruptions due to the supplier’s lack of availability of products or because the products are available, but the parties cannot agree on the delivery time or sales price.

          Another result that can be achieved is to bind a strategic supplier for a certain period by agreeing that it will reserve an agreed share of production for the buyer on predetermined terms and conditions and avoid competition with offers from third parties interested in the products for the duration of the agreement.

          When is it helpful to conclude a sales framework agreement?

          This agreement allows the seller/supplier to plan sales to a particular customer and thus to plan and organize its production and logistical capacity for the agreed period, avoiding extra costs or delays.

          Planning sales also makes it possible to correctly manage financial obligations and cash flows with a medium-term vision, harmonizing commitments and investments with the sales to one’s customers.

          What is the content of the supply framework agreement?

          There is no standard model of this agreement, which originated from business practice to meet the requirements indicated above.

          Generally, the agreement provides for a fixed period (e.g., 12 months) in which the parties undertake to conclude a series of purchases and sales of products, determining the price and terms of supply and the main covenants of future sales contracts.

          The most important clauses are:

          • the identification of products and technical specifications (often identified in an annex)
          • the minimum/maximum volume of supplies
          • the possible obligation to purchase/sell a minimum/maximum volume of products
          • the schedule of supplies
          • the delivery times
          • the determination of the price and the conditions for its possible modification (see also the next paragraph)
          • impediments to performance (Force Majeure)
          • cases of Hardship
          • penalties for delay or non-performance or for failure to achieve the agreed volumes
          • the hierarchy between the framework agreement and the orders and any other contracts between the parties
          • applicable law and dispute resolution (especially in international agreements)

          How to handle price revision in a supply contract?

          A crucial clause, especially in times of strong fluctuations in the prices of raw materials, transport, and energy, is the price revision clause.

          In the absence of an agreement on this issue, the parties bear the risk of a price increase by undertaking to respect the conditions initially agreed upon; except in exceptional cases (where the fluctuation is strong, affects a short period, and is caused by unforeseeable events), it isn’t straightforward to invoke the supervening excessive onerousness, which allows renegotiating the price, or the contract to be terminated.

          To avoid the uncertainty generated by price fluctuations, it is advisable to agree in the contract on the mechanisms for revising the price (e.g., automatic indexing following the quotation of raw materials). The so-called Hardship or Excessive Onerousness clause establishes what price fluctuation limits are accepted by the parties and what happens if the variations go beyond these limits, providing for the obligation to renegotiate the price or the termination of the contract if no agreement is reached within a certain period.

          How to manage delivery terms in a supply agreement?

          Another fundamental pact in a medium to long-term supply relationship concerns delivery terms. In this case, it is necessary to reconcile the purchaser’s interest in respecting the agreed dates with the supplier’s interest in avoiding claims for damages in the event of a delay, especially in the case of sales requiring intercontinental transport.

          The first thing to be clarified in this regard concerns the nature of delivery deadlines: are they essential or indicative? In the first case, the party affected has the right to terminate (i.e., wind up) the agreement in the event of non-compliance with the term; in the second case, due diligence, information, and timely notification of delays may be required, whereas termination is not a remedy that may be automatically invoked in the event of a delay.

          A useful instrument in this regard is the penalty clause: with this covenant, it is established that for each day/week/month of delay, a sum of money is due by way of damages in favor of the party harmed by the delay.

          If quantified correctly and not excessively, the penalty is helpful for both parties because it makes it possible to predict the damages that may be claimed for the delay, quantifying them in a fair and determined sum. Consequently, the seller is not exposed to claims for damages related to factors beyond his control. At the same time, the buyer can easily calculate the compensation for the delay without the need for further proof.

          The same mechanism, among other things, may be adopted to govern the buyer’s delay in accepting delivery of the goods.

          Finally, it is a good idea to specify the limit of the penalty (e.g.,10 percent of the price of the goods) and a maximum period of grace for the delay, beyond which the party concerned is entitled to terminate the contract by retaining the penalty.

          The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts

          A situation that is often confused with excessive onerousness, but is, in fact, quite different, is that of Force Majeure, i.e., the supervening impossibility of performance of the contractual obligation due to any event beyond the reasonable control of the party affected, which could not have been reasonably foreseen and the effects of which cannot be overcome by reasonable efforts.

          The function of this clause is to set forth clearly when the parties consider that Force Majeure may be invoked, what specific events are included (e.g., a lock-down of the production plant by order of the authority), and what are the consequences for the parties’ obligations (e.g., suspension of the obligation for a certain period, as long as the cause of impossibility of performance lasts, after which the party affected by performance may declare its intention to dissolve the contract).

          If the wording of this clause is general (as is often the case), the risk is that it will be of little use; it is also advisable to check that the regulation of force majeure complies with the law applicable to the contract (here an in-depth analysis indicating the regime provided for by 42 national laws).

          Applicable law and dispute resolution clauses

          Suppose the customer or supplier is based abroad. In that case, several significant differences must be borne in mind: the first is the agreement’s language, which must be intelligible to the foreign party, therefore usually in English or another language familiar to the parties, possibly also in two languages with parallel text.

          The second issue concerns the applicable law, which should be expressly indicated in the agreement. This subject matter is vast, and here we can say that the decision on the applicable law must be made on a case-by-case basis, intentionally: in fact, it is not always convenient to recall the application of the law of one’s own country.

          In most international sales contracts, the 1980 Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”) applies, a uniform law that is balanced, clear, and easy to understand. Therefore, it is not advisable to exclude it.

          Finally, in a supply framework agreement with an international supplier, it is important to identify the method of dispute resolution: no solution fits all. Choosing a country’s jurisdiction is not always the right decision (indeed, it can often prove counterproductive).

          Roberto Luzi Crivellini

          业务领域

          • 仲裁
          • 分销协议
          • 国际贸易
          • 诉讼
          • 房地产
          联系方式 Roberto

          写信给 Roberto





            阅读 Legalmondo 的隐私政策
            This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

            The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA)

            2023年1月5日

            • 非洲
            • 契约
            • 分销协议

            When selling health-related products, the question frequently arises as to which product category, and therefore which regulatory regime, they fall under. This question often arises when distinguishing between food supplements and medicinal products. But in other constellations, too, difficult questions of demarcation arise, which must be answered with a view to legally compliant marketing.

            In a highly interesting case, the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) of Düsseldorf, Germany, recently had to classify a CBD-containing (Cannabidiol) mouth spray that was explicitly advertised by its manufacturer as a “cosmetic” and therefore not suitable for human consumption. The Ingredients of the product were labelled: « Cannabis sativa seed oil, cannabidiol from cannabis extract, tincture or resin, cannabis sativa leaf extract ».

            The Product is additionally also labelled as follows: “Cosmetic oral care spray with hemp leaf extract. » The Instructions for use are: « Spray a maximum of 3 sprays a day into the mouth as desired. Spit out after 30 seconds and do not swallow. »

            A spray of the Product contains 10 mg CBD. This results in a maximum daily dose of 30 mg CBD as specified by the company.

            At the same time, however, it was pointed out that the “consumption” of a spray shot was harmless to health.

            The mouth spray could therefore be consumed like a food, but was declared as a “cosmetic”. This is precisely where the court had to examine whether the prohibition order based on food law was lawful.

            For the definition of cosmetic products Article 2 sentence 4 lit. e) Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 refers to Directive 76/768/EEC. This was replaced by Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009. Cosmetic products are defined in Article 2(1)(a) as follows: “‘cosmetic product’ means any substance or mixture intended to be placed in contact with the external parts of the human body (epidermis, hair system, nails, lips and external genital organs) or with the teeth and the mucous membranes of the oral cavity with a view exclusively or mainly to cleaning them, perfuming them, changing their appearance, protecting them, keeping them in good condition or correcting body odours ”.

            Here too, it is not the composition of the product that is decisive, but its intended purpose, which is to be determined on the basis of objective criteria according to general public opinion based on concrete evidence.

            According to the system of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002, Article 2 sentence 1 first defines foodstuffs in general and then excludes cosmetic products under sentence 4 lit. e). According to the definition in Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009, cosmetic products must have an exclusive or at least predominant cosmetic purpose. It can be concluded from this system that the exclusivity or predominance must be positively established. If it is not possible to determine which purpose predominates, the product is a foodstuff.

            The Düsseldorf Administrative Court had to deal with this question in the aforementioned legal dispute brought by the distributor against an official prohibition order in the form of a so-called general ruling („Allgemeinverfügung“). By notice dated July 11, 2020, the competent authority issued a general ruling prohibiting the marketing of foodstuffs containing “cannabidiol (as ‘CBD isolates’ or ‘hemp extracts enriched with CBD’)” in their urban area. The company, based in this city, offered the mouth spray described above.

            In a ruling dated 25.10.2024 (Courts Ref. : 26 K 2072/23), the court dismissed the company’s claim. The court’s main arguments were :

            1. Classification as food: the CBD spray was correctly classified as food by the authority, as it was reasonable to expect that it could be swallowed despite indications to the contrary. According to an objective perception of the market, there is a now established expectation of an average informed, attentive and reasonable consumer to the effect that CBD oils are intended as “lifestyle” products for oral ingestion, from which consumers hope for positive health effects The labelling as “cosmetic” was refuted by the objective consumer expectations and the nature of the application.
            2. No medicinal product status: Due to the low dosage in this case (max. 30 mg CBD per day), the product was not classified as a functional medicinal product, as there was no sufficiently proven pharmacological effect.
            3. Legal basis of the injunction: The prohibition of the sale of the products by the defendant was based on a general order, which was confirmed as lawful by the court.

            In the ruling, the court emphasizes the objective consumer expectation and clarifies that products cannot be exempted from a different regulatory classification by the authorities or the courts solely by their labelling.

            Conclusion: The decision presented underlines the considerable importance of the “correct” classification of a health product in the respective legal product category. In addition to the classic distinction between foodstuffs (food supplements) and medicinal products, comparable issues also arise with other product types. In this case in the constellation of cosmetics versus food – combined with the special legal component of the use of CBD.

            The author of this article is Matthias Hesshaus

            Commercial agents have specific regulations with rights and obligations that are “mandatory”: those who sign an agency contract cannot derogate from them. Answering whether an influencer can be an agent is essential because, if he or she is an agent, the agent regulations will apply to him or her.

            Let’s take it one step at a time. The influencer we will talk about is the person who, with their actions and comments (blogs, social media accounts, videos, events, or a bit of everything), talks to their followers about the advantages of certain products or services identified with a certain third-party brand. In exchange for this, the influencer is paid.[1]

            A commercial agent is someone who promotes the contracting of others’ products or services, does so in a stable way, and gets paid in return. He or she can also conclude the contract, but this is not essential.

            The law imposes certain obligations and guarantees rights to those signing an agency contract. If the influencer is considered an “agent”, he or she should also have them. And there are several of them: for example, the duration, the notice to be given to terminate the contract, the obligations of the parties… And the most relevant, the right of the agent to receive compensation at the end of the relationship for the clientele that has been generated. If an influencer is an agent, he would also have this right.

            How can an influencer be assessed as an agent? For that we must analyse two things: (a) the contract (and be careful because there is a contract, even if it is not written) and (b) how the parties have behaved.

            The elements that, in my opinion, are most relevant to conclude that an influencer is an agent would be the following:

             

            a) the influencer promotes the contracting of services or the purchase of products and does so independently.

            The contract will indicate what the influencer must do. It will be clearer to consider him as an agent if his comments encourage contracting: for example, if they include a link to the manufacturer’s website, if he offers a discount code, if he allows orders to be placed with him. And if he does so as an independent “professional”, and not as an employee (with a timetable, means, instructions).

            It may be more difficult to consider him as an agent if he limits himself to talking about the benefits of the product or service, appearing in advertising as a brand image, and using a certain product, and speaking well of it. The important thing, in my opinion, is to examine whether the influencer’s activity is aimed at getting people to buy the product he or she is talking about, or whether what he or she is doing is more generic persuasion (appearing in advertising, lending his or her image to a product, carrying out demonstrations of its use), or even whether he or she is only seeking to promote himself or herself as a vehicle for general information (for example, influencers who make comparisons of products without trying to get people to buy one or the other). In the first case (trying to get people to buy the product) it would be easier to consider it as an “agent”, and less so in the other examples.

             

            b) this “promotion” is done in a continuous or stable manner.

            Be careful because this continuity or stability does not mean that the contract has to be of indefinite duration. Rather, it is the opposite of a sporadic relationship. A one-year contract may be sufficient, while several unconnected interventions, even if they last longer, may not be sufficient.

            In this case, influencers who make occasional comments, who intervene with isolated actions, who limit themselves to making comparisons without promoting the purchase of one or the other, and even if all this leads to sales, even if their comments are frequent and even if they can have a great influence on the behavior of their followers, would be excluded as agents.

             

            c) they receive remuneration for their activity.

            An influencer who is remunerated based on sales (e.g., by promoting a discount code, a specific link, or referring to your website for orders) can more easily be considered as an agent. But also, if he or she only receives a fixed amount for their promotion. On the other hand, influencers who do not receive any remuneration from the brand (e.g. someone who talks about the benefits of a product in comparison with others, but without linking it to its promotion) would be excluded.

             

            Conclusion

            The borderline between what qualifies an influencer as an agent and what does not can be very thin, especially because contracts are often not unambiguous and sometimes their services are multiple. The most important thing is to carefully analyse the contract and the parties’ behaviour.

            An influencer could be considered a commercial agent to the extent that his or her activity promotes the contracting of the product (not simply if he or she carries out informative or image work), that it is done on a stable basis (and not merely anecdotal or sporadic) and in exchange for remuneration.

            To assess the specific situation, it is essential to analyse the contract (if it is written, this is easier) and the parties’ behaviour.

            In short, to draw up a contract with an influencer or, if it has already been signed, but you want to conclude it, you will have to pay attention to these elements. As an influencer you may have a strong interest in being considered an agent at the end of the contract and thus be entitled to compensation, while as employer you will prefer the opposite.

            FINAL NOTE. In Spain and at the date of this comment (9 June 2024) I am not aware of any judgement dealing with this issue. My proposal is based on my experience of more than 30 years advising and litigating on agency contracts. On the other hand, and as far as I know, there is at least one judgment in Rome (Italy) dealing with the matter: Tribunale di Roma; Sezione Lavoro 4º, St. 2615 of 4 March 2024; R. G. n. 38445/2022.

            The commercial agent has the right to obtain certain information about the sales of the principal. The Spanish Law on Agency Contracts provides (15.2 LCA) that the agent has the right to demand to see the accounts of the principal in order to verify all matters relating to the commissions due to him. And also, to be provided with the information available to the principal and necessary to verify the amount of such commissions.

            This article is in line with the 1986 Commercial Agents Directive, according to which (12.3) the agent is entitled to demand to be provided with all information at the disposal of the principal, particularly an extract from the books of account, which is necessary to verify the amount of commission due to the agent. This may not be altered to the detriment of the commercial agent by agreement.

            The question is, does this right remain even after the termination of the agency contract? In other words: once the agency contract is terminated, can the agent request the information and documentation mentioned in these articles and is the Principal obliged to provide it?

            In our opinion, the rule does not say anything that limits this right, rather the opposite is to be expected. Therefore, to the extent that there is still any possible commission that may arise from such verification, the answer must be yes. Let us see.

            The right to demand the production of accounts exists so that the agent can verify the amount of commissions. And the agent is entitled to commissions for acts and operations concluded during the term of the contract (art. 12 LCA), but also for acts or operations concluded after the termination of the contract (art. 13 LCA), and for operations not carried out due to circumstances attributable to the principal (art. 17 LCA). In addition, the agent is entitled to have the commission accrued at the time when the act or transaction should have been executed (art. 14 LCA).

            All these transactions can take place after the conclusion of the contract. Consider the usual situation where orders are placed during the contract but are accepted or executed afterwards. To reduce the agent’s right to be informed only during the term of the contract would be to limit his entitlement to the corresponding commission unduly. And it should be borne in mind that the amount of the commissions during the last five years may also influence the calculation of the client (goodwill) indemnity (art. 28 LCA), so that the agent’s interest in knowing them is twofold: what he would receive as commission, and what could increase the basis for future indemnity.

            This has been confirmed, for example, by the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) of Madrid (AAP 227/2017, of 29 June [ECLI:ES:APM:2017:2873A]) which textually states:

            […] art. 15.2 of the Agency Contract Act provides for the right of the agent to demand the exhibition of the Principal’s accounts in the particulars necessary to verify everything relating to the commissions corresponding to him, as well as to be provided with the information available to the Principal and necessary to verify the amount. This does not prevent, […], the agency contract having already been terminated, as this does not imply that commissions would cease to accrue for policies, contracted with the mediation of the agent, which remain in force.

            The question then arises as to whether this right to information is unlimited in time. And here the answer would be in the negative. The limitation of the right to receive information would be linked to the statute of limitations of the right to claim the corresponding commission. If the right to receive the commission were undoubtedly time-barred, it could be argued that it would not be possible to receive information about it. But for such an exception, the statute of limitations must be clear, therefore, taking into account possible interruptions due to claims, even extrajudicial ones. In case of doubt, it will be necessary to recognise the right to demand the information, without prejudice to later invoking and recognising the impossibility of claiming the commission if the right is time-barred. And for this we must consider the limitation period for claiming commissions (in general, three years) and that of the right to claim compensation for clientele (one year).

            In short: it does not seem that the right to receive information and to examine the principal’s documentation is limited by the term of the agency contract; although, on the other hand, it would be appropriate to analyse the possible limitation period for claiming commissions. In the absence of a clear answer to this question, the right to information should, in our opinion, prevail, without prejudice to the fact that the result may not entitle the claim because it is time-barred.

            SUMMARY: In large-scale events such as the Paris Olympics certain companies will attempt to “wildly” associate their brand with the event through a practice called “ambush marketing”, defined by caselaw as “an advertising strategy implemented by a company in order to associate its commercial image with that of an event, and thus to benefit from the media impact of said event, without paying the related rights and without first obtaining the event organizer’s authorization” (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912). A risky and punishable practice, that might sometimes yet be an option yet.

            Key takeaways

            • Ambush marketing might be a punished practice but is not prohibited as such;
            • As a counterpart of their investment, sponsors and official partners benefit from an extensive legal protection against all forms of ambush marketing in the event concerned, through various general texts (counterfeiting, parasitism, intellectual property) or more specific ones (e.g. sport law);
            • The Olympics Games are subject to specific regulations that further strengthen this protection, particularly in terms of intellectual property.
            • But these rights are not absolute, and they are still thin opportunities for astute ambush marketing.

            The protection offered to sponsors and official partners of sporting and cultural events from ambush marketing

            With a budget of over 4 billion euros, the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games are financed mostly by various official partners and sponsors, who in return benefit from a right to use Olympic and Paralympic properties to be able to associate their own brand image and distinctive signs with these events.

            Ambush marketing is not punishable as such under French law, but several scattered texts provide extensive protection against ambush marketing for sponsors and partners of sporting or cultural continental-wide or world-wide events. Indeed, sponsors are legitimately entitled to peacefully enjoy the rights offered to them in return for large-scale investments in events such as the FIFA or rugby World Cups, or the Olympic Games.

            In particular, official sponsors and organizers of such events may invoke:

            • the “classic” protections offered by intellectual property law (trademark law and copyright) in the context of infringement actions based on the French Intellectual Property Code,
            • tort law (parasitism and unfair competition based on article 1240 of the French Civil Code);
            • consumer law (misleading commercial practices) based on the French Consumer Code,
            • but also more specific texts such as the protection of the exploitation rights of sports federations and sports event organizers derived from the events or competitions they organize, as set out in article L.333-1 of the French Sports Code, which gives sports event organizers an exploitation monopoly.

            The following ambush marketing practices were sanctioned on the abovementioned grounds:

            • The use of a tennis competition name and of the trademark associated with it during the sporting event: The organization of online bets, by an online betting operator, on the Roland Garros tournament, using the protected sign and trademark Roland Garros to target the matches on which the bets were organized. The unlawful exploitation of the sporting event, was punished and 400 K€ were allowed as damages, based on article L. 333-1 of the French Sports Code, since only the French Tennis Federation (F.F.T.) owns the right to exploit Roland Garros. The use of the trademark was also punished as counterfeiting (with 300 K€ damages) and parasitism (with 500 K€ damages) (Paris Court of Appeal, Oct. 14, 2009, Case No 08/19179);
            • An advertising campaign taking place during a film festival and reproducing the event’s trademark: The organization, during the Cannes Film Festival, of a digital advertising campaign by a cosmetics brand through the publication on its social networks of videos showing the beauty makeovers of the brand’s muses, in some of which the official poster of the Cannes Film Festival was visible, one of which reproduced the registered trademark of the “Palme d’Or”, was punished on the grounds of copyright infringement and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Judicial Court, Dec. 11, 2020, Case No19/08543);
            • An advertising campaign aimed at falsely claiming to be an official partner of an event: The use, during the Cannes Film Festival, of the slogan “official hairdresser for women” together with the expressions “Cannes” and “Cannes Festival”, and other publications falsely leading the public to believe that the hairdresser was an official partner, to the detriment of the only official hairdresser of the Cannes festival, was punished on the grounds of unfair competition and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912).

            These financial penalties may be combined with injunctions to cease these behaviors, and/or publication in the press under penalty.

            An even greater protection for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games

            The Paris 2024 Olympic Games are also subject to specific regulations.

            Firstly, Article L.141-5 of the French Sports Code, enacted for the benefit of the “Comité national olympique et sportif français” (CNOSF) and the “Comité de l’organisation des Jeux Olympiques et Paralympiques de Paris 2024” (COJOP), protects Olympic signs such as the national Olympic emblems, but also the emblems, the flag, motto and Olympic symbol, Olympic anthem, logo, mascot, slogan and posters of the Olympic Games, the year of the Olympic Games “city + year”, the terms “Jeux Olympiques”, “Olympisme”, “Olympiade”, “JO”, “olympique”, “olympien” and “olympienne”. Under no circumstances may these signs be reproduced or even imitated by third-party companies. The COJOP has also published a guide to the protection of the Olympic trademark, outlining the protected symbols, trademarks and signs, as well as the protection of the official partners of the Olympic Games.

            Secondly, Law no. 2018-202 of March 26, 2018 on the organization of the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games adds even more specific prohibitions, such as the reservation for official sponsors of advertising space located near Olympic venues, or located on the Olympic and Paralympic torch route. This protection is unique in the context of the Olympic Games, but usually unregulated in the context of simple sporting events.

            The following practices, for example, have already been sanctioned on the above-mentioned grounds:

            • Reproduction of a logo imitating the well-known “Olympic” trademark on a clothing collection: The marketing of a collection of clothing, during the 2016 Olympic Games, bearing a logo (five hearts in the colors of the 5 Olympic colors intersecting in the image of the Olympic logo) imitating the Olympic symbol in association with the words “RIO” and “RIO 2016”, was punished on the grounds of parasitism (10 K€ damages) and articles L. 141-5 of the French Sports Code (35 K€) and L. 713-1 of the French Intellectual Property Code (10 K€ damages) (Paris Judicial Court, June 7, 2018, Case No16/10605);
            • The organization of a contest on social networks using protected symbols: During the 2018 Olympic Games in PyeongChang, a car rental company organized an online game inviting Internet users to nominate the athletes they wanted to win a clock radio, associated with the hashtags “#JO2018” (“#OJ2018”), “#Jeuxolympiques” (“#Olympicsgame”) or “C’est parti pour les jeux Olympiques” (“let’s go for the Olympic Games”) without authorization from the CNOSF, owner of these distinctive signs under the 2018 law and article L.141-5 of the French Sport Code and punished on these grounds with 20 K€ damages and of 10 K€ damages for parasitism (Paris Judicial Court, May 29, 2020, n°18/14115).

            These regulations offer official partners greater protection for their investments against ambush marketing practices from non-official sponsors.

            Some marketing operations might be exempted

            An analysis of case law and promotional practices nonetheless reveals the contours of certain advertising practices that could be authorized (i.e. not sanctioned by the above-mentioned texts), provided they are skillfully prepared and presented. Here are a few exemples :

            • Communication of information for advertising purposes: The use of the results of a rugby match and the announcement of a forthcoming match in a newspaper to promote a motor vehicle and its distinctive features was deemed lawful: “France 13 Angleterre 24 – the Fiat 500 congratulates England on its victory and looks forward to seeing the French team on March 9 for France-Italy” (France 13 Angleterre 24 – la Fiat 500 félicite l’Angleterre pour sa victoire et donne rendez-vous à l’équipe de France le 9 mars pour France-Italie) the judges having considered that this publication “merely reproduces a current sporting result, acquired and made public on the front page of the sports newspaper, and refers to a future match also known as already announced by the newspaper in a news article” (Court of cassation, May 20, 2014, Case No 13-12.102).
            • Sponsorship of athletes, including those taking part in Olympic competitions: Subject to compliance with the applicable regulatory framework, particularly as regards models, any company may enter into partnerships with athletes taking part in the Olympic Games, for example by donating clothing bearing the desired logo or brand, which they could wear during their participation in the various events. Athletes may also, under certain conditions, broadcast acknowledgements from their partner (even if unofficial). Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter governs the use of athletes’, coaches’ and officials’ images for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.

            The combined legal and marketing approach to the conception and preparation of the message of such a communication operation is essential to avoid legal proceedings, particularly on the grounds of parasitism; one might therefore legitimately contemplate advertising campaigns, particularly clever, or even malicious ones.

            In this first episode of Legalmondo’s Distribution Talks series, I spoke with Ignacio Alonso, a Madrid-based lawyer with extensive experience in international commercial distribution.

            Main discussion points:

            • in Spain, there is no specific law for distribution agreements, which are governed by the general rules of the Commercial Code;
            • therefore, it is essential to draft a clear and comprehensive contract, which will be the primary source of the parties’ rights and obligations;
            • it is also good to be aware of Spanish case law on commercial distribution, which in some cases applies the law on commercial agency by analogy.
            • the most common issues involving foreign producers distributing in Spain arise at the time of termination of the relationship, mainly because case law grants the terminated distributor an indemnity of clientele or goodwill if similar prerequisites to those in the agency regulations apply.
            • another frequent dispute concerns the adequacy of the notice period for terminating the contract, especially if there is no agreement between the parties: the advice is to follow what the agency regulations stipulate and thus establish a minimum notice period of one month for each year of the contract’s duration, up to 6 months for agreements lasting more than five years;
            • regarding dispute resolution tools, mediation is an option that should be carefully considered because it is quick, inexpensive, and allows a shared solution to be sought flexibly without disrupting the business relationship.
            • if mediation fails, the parties can provide for recourse to arbitration or state court. The choice depends on the case’s specific circumstances, and one factor in favor of jurisdiction is the possibility of appeal, which is excluded in the case of arbitration.

            Go deeper

            Summary

            On 1 June 2022, Regulation EU n. 720/2022, i.e.: the new Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (hereinafter: “VBER”), replaced the previous version (Regulation EU n. 330/2010), expired on 31 May 2022.

            The new VBER and the new vertical guidelines (hereinafter: “Guidelines”) have received the main evidence gathered during the lifetime of the previous VBER and contain some relevant provisions affecting the discipline of all B2B agreements among businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain.

            In this article, we will focus on the impact of the new VBER on sales through digital platforms, listing the main novelties impacting distribution chains, including a platform for marketing products/services.

            The general discipline of vertical agreements

            Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibits all agreements that prevent, restrict, or distort competition within the EU market, listing the main types, e.g.: price fixing; market partitioning; limitations on production/development/investment; unfair terms, etc.

            However, Article 101(3) TFEU exempts from such restrictions the agreements that contribute to improving the EU market, to be identified in a special category Regulation.

            The VBER establishes the category of vertical agreements (i.e., agreements between businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain), determining which of these agreements are exempted from Article 101(1) TFEU prohibition.

            In short, vertical agreements are presumed to be exempted (and therefore valid) if they do not contain so-called “hardcore restrictions” (i.e., severe restrictions of competition, such as an absolute ban on sales in a territory or the manufacturer’s determination of the distributor’s resale price) and if neither party’s market share exceeds 30%.

            The exempted agreements benefit from what has been termed the “safe harbour” of the VBER. In contrast, the others will be subject to the general prohibition of Article 101(1) TFEU unless they can benefit from an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

            The innovations introduced by the new VBER to online platforms

            The first relevant aspect concerns the classification of the platforms, as the European Commission excluded that the online platform generally meets the conditions to be categorized as agency agreements.

            While there have never been doubts concerning platforms that operate by purchasing and reselling products (classic example: Amazon Retail), some have arisen concerning those platforms that merely promote the products of third parties without carrying out the activity of resale (classic example: Amazon Marketplace).

            With this statement, the European Commission wanted to clear the field of doubt, making explicit that intermediation service providers (such as online platforms) qualify as suppliers (as opposed to commercial agents) under the VBER. This reflects the approach of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 (“P2B Regulation”), which has, for the first time, dictated a specific discipline for digital platforms. It provided for a set of rules to create a “fair, transparent, and predictable environment” for smaller businesses and customers” and for the rationale of the Digital Markets Act, banning certain practices used by large platforms acting as “gatekeepers”.

            Therefore, all contracts concluded between manufacturers and platforms (defined as ‘providers of online intermediation services’) are subject to all the restrictions imposed by the VBER. These include the price, the territories to which or the customers to whom the intermediated goods or services may be sold, or the restrictions relating to online advertising and selling.

            Thus, to give an example, the operator of a platform may not impose a fixed or minimum sale price for a transaction promoted through the platform.

            The second most impactful aspect concerns hybrid platforms, i.e., competing in the relevant market to sell intermediated goods or services. Amazon is the most well-known example, as it is a provider of intermediation services (“Amazon Marketplace”), and – at the same time – it distributes the products of those parties (“Amazon Retail”). We have previously explored the distinction between those 2 business models (and the consequences in terms of intellectual property infringement) here.

            The new VBER explicitly does not apply to hybrid platforms. Therefore, the agreements concluded among such platforms and manufacturers are subject to the limitations of the TFEU, as such providers may have the incentive to favour their sales and the ability to influence the outcome of competition between undertakings that use their online intermediation services.

            Those agreements must be assessed individually under Article 101 of the TFEU, as they do not necessarily restrict competition within the meaning of TFEU, or they may fulfil the conditions of an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

            The third very relevant aspect concerns the parity obligations (also referred to as Most Favoured Nation Clauses, or MFNs), i.e., the contract provisions in which a seller (directly or indirectly) agrees to give the buyer the best terms it makes available to any other buyer.

            Indeed, platforms’ contractual terms often contain parity obligation clauses to prevent users from offering their products/services at lower prices or on better conditions on their websites or other platforms.

            The new VBER deals explicitly with parity clauses, making a distinction between clauses whose purpose is to prohibit users of a platform from selling goods or services on more favourable terms through competing platforms (so-called “wide parity clauses”), and clauses that prohibit sales on more favourable terms only in respect of channels operated directly by the users (so-called “narrow parity clauses”).

            Wide parity clauses do not benefit from the VBER exemption; therefore, such obligations must be assessed individually under Article 101(3) TFEU.

            On the other hand, narrow parity clauses continue to benefit from the exemption already granted by the old VBER if they do not exceed the threshold of 30% of the relevant market share set out in Article 3 of the new VBER. However, the new Guidelines warn against using overly narrow parity obligations by online platforms covering a significant share of users, stating that if there is no evidence of pro-competitive effects, the benefit of the block exemption is likely to be withdrawn.

            Impact and takeaways

            The new VBER entered into force on 1 June 2022 and is already applicable to agreements signed after that date. Agreements already in force on 31 May 2022 that satisfy the conditions for exemption under the current VBER but do not satisfy the requirements under the new VBER shall benefit from a one-year transitional period.

            The new regime will be the playing field for all platform-driven sales over the next 12 years (the regulation expires on 31 May 2034). Currently, the rather restrictive novelties on hybrid platforms and parity obligations will likely necessitate substantial revisions to existing trade agreements.

            Here, then, are some tips for managing contracts and relationships with online platforms:

            • the new VBER is the right opportunity to review the existing distribution networks. The revision will have to consider not only the new regulatory limits (e.g., the ban on wide parity clauses) but also the new discipline reserved for hybrid platforms and dual distribution to coordinate the different distribution channels as efficiently as possible, by the stakes set by the new VBER and the Guidelines;
            • platforms are likely to play an even greater role during the next decade; it is, therefore, essential to consider these sales channels from the outset, coordinating them with the other existing ones (retail, direct sales, distributors, etc.) to avoid jeopardizing the marketing of products or services;
            • the European legislator’s attention toward platforms is growing. Looking up from the VBER, one should not forget that they are subject to a multitude of other European regulations, which are gradually regulating the sector and which must be considered when concluding contracts with platforms. The reference is not only to the recent Digital Market Act and P2B Regulation but also to the protection of IP rights on platforms, which – as we have already seen – is still an open issue.

            Summary

            To avoid disputes with important suppliers, it is advisable to plan purchases over the medium and long term and not operate solely on the basis of orders and order confirmations. Planning makes it possible to agree on the duration of the ‘supply agreement, minimum volumes of products to be delivered and delivery schedules, prices, and the conditions under which prices can be varied over time.
            The use of a framework purchase agreement can help avoid future uncertainties and allows various options to be used to manage commodity price fluctuations depending on the type of products , such as automatic price indexing or agreement to renegotiate in the event of commodity fluctuations beyond a certain set tolerance period.

            I read in a press release: “These days, the glass industry is sending wine companies new unilateral contract amendments with price changes of 20%…”

            What can one do to avoid the imposition of price increases by suppliers? 

            • Know your rights and act in an informed manner
            • Plan and organise your supply chain

            Does my supplier have the right to increase prices?

            If contracts have already been concluded, e.g., orders have already been confirmed by the supplier, the answer is often no.

            It is not legitimate to request a price change. It is much less legitimate to communicate it unilaterally, with the threat of cancelling the order or not delivering the goods if the request is not granted.

            What if he tells me it is force majeure?

            That’s wrong: increased costs are not a force majeure but rather an unforeseen excessive onerousness, which hardly happens.

            What if the supplier canceled the order, unilaterally increased the price, or did not deliver the goods?

            He would be in breach of contract and liable to pay damages for violating his contractual obligations.

            How can one avoid a tug-of-war with suppliers?

            The tools are there. You have to know them and use them.

            It is necessary to plan purchases in the medium term, agreeing with suppliers on a schedule in which are set out:

            • the quantities of products to be ordered
            • the delivery terms
            • the durationof the agreement
            • the pricesof the products or raw materials
            • the conditions under which prices can be varied

            There is a very effective instrument to do so: a framework purchase agreement.

            Using a framework purchase agreement, the parties negotiate the above elements, which will be valid for the agreed period.

            Once the agreement is concluded, product orders will follow, governed by the framework agreement, without the need to renegotiate the content of individual deliveries each time.

            For an in-depth discussion of this contract, see this article.

            • “Yes, but my suppliers will never sign it!”

            Why not? Ask them to explain the reason.

            This type of agreement is in the interest of both parties. It allows planning future orders and grants certainty as to whether, when, and how much the parties can change the price.

            In contrast, acting without written agreements forces the parties to operate in an environment of uncertainty. Suppliers can request price increases from one day to the next and refuse supply if the changes are not accepted.

            How are price changes for future supplies regulated?

            Depending on the type of products or services and the raw materials or energy relevant in determining the final price, there are several possibilities.

            • The first option is to index the price automatically. E.g., if the cost of a barrel of Brent oil increases/decreases by 10%, the party concerned is entitled to request a corresponding adjustment of the product’s price in all orders placed as of the following week.
            • An alternative is to provide for a price renegotiation in the event of a fluctuation of the reference commodity. E.g., suppose the LME Aluminium index of the London Stock Exchange increases above a certain threshold. In that case, the interested party may request a price renegotiationfor orders in the period following the increase.

            What if the parties do not agree on new prices?

            It is possible to terminate the contract or refer the price determination to a third party, who would act as arbitrator and set the new prices for future orders.

            Summary

            The framework supply contract is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier) that take place over a certain period of time. This agreement determines the main elements of future contracts such as price, product volumes, delivery terms, technical or quality specifications, and the duration of the agreement.

            The framework contract is useful for ensuring continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a certain product that is essential for planning industrial or commercial activity. While the general terms and conditions of purchase or sale are the rules that apply to all suppliers or customers of the company. The framework contract is advisable to be concluded with essential suppliers for the continuity of business activity, in general or in relation to a particular project.

            What I am talking about in this article:

            • What is the supply framework agreement?
            • What is the function of the supply framework agreement?
            • The difference with the general conditions of sale or purchase
            • When to enter a purchase framework agreement?
            • When is it beneficial to conclude a sales framework agreement?
            • The content of the supply framework agreement
            • Price revision clause and hardship
            • Delivery terms in the supply framework agreement
            • The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts
            • International sales: applicable law and dispute resolution arrangements

            What is a framework supply agreement?

            It is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier), which will take place over a certain period.

            It is therefore referred to as a “framework agreement” because it is an agreement that establishes the rules of a future series of sales and purchase contracts, determining their primary elements (such as the price, the volumes of products to be sold and purchased, the delivery terms of the products, and the duration of the contract).

            After concluding the framework agreement, the parties will exchange orders and order confirmations, entering a series of autonomous sales contracts without re-discussing the covenants already defined in the framework agreement.

            Depending on one’s point of view, this agreement is also called a sales framework agreement (if the seller/supplier uses it) or a purchasing framework agreement (if the customer proposes it).

            What is the function of the framework supply agreement?

            It is helpful to arrange a framework agreement in all cases where the parties intend to proceed with a series of purchases/sales of products over time and are interested in giving stability to the commercial agreement by determining its main elements.

            In particular, the purchase framework agreement may be helpful to a company that wishes to ensure continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a specific product that is essential for planning its industrial or commercial activity (raw material, semi-finished product, component).

            By concluding the framework agreement, the company can obtain, for example, a commitment from the supplier to supply a particular minimum volume of products, at a specific price, with agreed terms and technical specifications, for a certain period.

            This agreement is also beneficial, at the same time, to the seller/supplier, which can plan sales for that period and organize, in turn, the supply chain that enables it to procure the raw materials and components necessary to produce the products.

            What is the difference between a purchase or sales framework agreement and the general terms and conditions?

            Whereas the framework agreement is an agreement that is used with one or more suppliers for a specific product and a certain time frame, determining the essential elements of future contracts, the general purchase (or sales) conditions are the rules that apply to all the company’s suppliers (or customers).

            The first agreement, therefore, is negotiated and defined on a case-by-case basis. At the same time, the general conditions are prepared unilaterally by the company, and the customers or suppliers (depending on whether they are sales or purchase conditions) adhere to and accept that the general conditions apply to the individual order and/or future contracts.

            The two agreements might also co-exist: in that case; it is a good idea to specify which contract should prevail in the event of a discrepancy between the different provisions (usually, this hierarchy is envisaged, ranging from the special to the general: order – order confirmation; framework agreement; general terms and conditions of purchase).

            When is it important to conclude a purchase framework agreement?

            It is beneficial to conclude this agreement when dealing with a mono-supplier or a supplier that would be very difficult to replace if it stopped selling products to the purchasing company.

            The risks one aims to avoid or diminish are so-called stock-outs, i.e., supply interruptions due to the supplier’s lack of availability of products or because the products are available, but the parties cannot agree on the delivery time or sales price.

            Another result that can be achieved is to bind a strategic supplier for a certain period by agreeing that it will reserve an agreed share of production for the buyer on predetermined terms and conditions and avoid competition with offers from third parties interested in the products for the duration of the agreement.

            When is it helpful to conclude a sales framework agreement?

            This agreement allows the seller/supplier to plan sales to a particular customer and thus to plan and organize its production and logistical capacity for the agreed period, avoiding extra costs or delays.

            Planning sales also makes it possible to correctly manage financial obligations and cash flows with a medium-term vision, harmonizing commitments and investments with the sales to one’s customers.

            What is the content of the supply framework agreement?

            There is no standard model of this agreement, which originated from business practice to meet the requirements indicated above.

            Generally, the agreement provides for a fixed period (e.g., 12 months) in which the parties undertake to conclude a series of purchases and sales of products, determining the price and terms of supply and the main covenants of future sales contracts.

            The most important clauses are:

            • the identification of products and technical specifications (often identified in an annex)
            • the minimum/maximum volume of supplies
            • the possible obligation to purchase/sell a minimum/maximum volume of products
            • the schedule of supplies
            • the delivery times
            • the determination of the price and the conditions for its possible modification (see also the next paragraph)
            • impediments to performance (Force Majeure)
            • cases of Hardship
            • penalties for delay or non-performance or for failure to achieve the agreed volumes
            • the hierarchy between the framework agreement and the orders and any other contracts between the parties
            • applicable law and dispute resolution (especially in international agreements)

            How to handle price revision in a supply contract?

            A crucial clause, especially in times of strong fluctuations in the prices of raw materials, transport, and energy, is the price revision clause.

            In the absence of an agreement on this issue, the parties bear the risk of a price increase by undertaking to respect the conditions initially agreed upon; except in exceptional cases (where the fluctuation is strong, affects a short period, and is caused by unforeseeable events), it isn’t straightforward to invoke the supervening excessive onerousness, which allows renegotiating the price, or the contract to be terminated.

            To avoid the uncertainty generated by price fluctuations, it is advisable to agree in the contract on the mechanisms for revising the price (e.g., automatic indexing following the quotation of raw materials). The so-called Hardship or Excessive Onerousness clause establishes what price fluctuation limits are accepted by the parties and what happens if the variations go beyond these limits, providing for the obligation to renegotiate the price or the termination of the contract if no agreement is reached within a certain period.

            How to manage delivery terms in a supply agreement?

            Another fundamental pact in a medium to long-term supply relationship concerns delivery terms. In this case, it is necessary to reconcile the purchaser’s interest in respecting the agreed dates with the supplier’s interest in avoiding claims for damages in the event of a delay, especially in the case of sales requiring intercontinental transport.

            The first thing to be clarified in this regard concerns the nature of delivery deadlines: are they essential or indicative? In the first case, the party affected has the right to terminate (i.e., wind up) the agreement in the event of non-compliance with the term; in the second case, due diligence, information, and timely notification of delays may be required, whereas termination is not a remedy that may be automatically invoked in the event of a delay.

            A useful instrument in this regard is the penalty clause: with this covenant, it is established that for each day/week/month of delay, a sum of money is due by way of damages in favor of the party harmed by the delay.

            If quantified correctly and not excessively, the penalty is helpful for both parties because it makes it possible to predict the damages that may be claimed for the delay, quantifying them in a fair and determined sum. Consequently, the seller is not exposed to claims for damages related to factors beyond his control. At the same time, the buyer can easily calculate the compensation for the delay without the need for further proof.

            The same mechanism, among other things, may be adopted to govern the buyer’s delay in accepting delivery of the goods.

            Finally, it is a good idea to specify the limit of the penalty (e.g.,10 percent of the price of the goods) and a maximum period of grace for the delay, beyond which the party concerned is entitled to terminate the contract by retaining the penalty.

            The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts

            A situation that is often confused with excessive onerousness, but is, in fact, quite different, is that of Force Majeure, i.e., the supervening impossibility of performance of the contractual obligation due to any event beyond the reasonable control of the party affected, which could not have been reasonably foreseen and the effects of which cannot be overcome by reasonable efforts.

            The function of this clause is to set forth clearly when the parties consider that Force Majeure may be invoked, what specific events are included (e.g., a lock-down of the production plant by order of the authority), and what are the consequences for the parties’ obligations (e.g., suspension of the obligation for a certain period, as long as the cause of impossibility of performance lasts, after which the party affected by performance may declare its intention to dissolve the contract).

            If the wording of this clause is general (as is often the case), the risk is that it will be of little use; it is also advisable to check that the regulation of force majeure complies with the law applicable to the contract (here an in-depth analysis indicating the regime provided for by 42 national laws).

            Applicable law and dispute resolution clauses

            Suppose the customer or supplier is based abroad. In that case, several significant differences must be borne in mind: the first is the agreement’s language, which must be intelligible to the foreign party, therefore usually in English or another language familiar to the parties, possibly also in two languages with parallel text.

            The second issue concerns the applicable law, which should be expressly indicated in the agreement. This subject matter is vast, and here we can say that the decision on the applicable law must be made on a case-by-case basis, intentionally: in fact, it is not always convenient to recall the application of the law of one’s own country.

            In most international sales contracts, the 1980 Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”) applies, a uniform law that is balanced, clear, and easy to understand. Therefore, it is not advisable to exclude it.

            Finally, in a supply framework agreement with an international supplier, it is important to identify the method of dispute resolution: no solution fits all. Choosing a country’s jurisdiction is not always the right decision (indeed, it can often prove counterproductive).

            Christian Ule

            业务领域

            • 仲裁
            • 契约
            • 公司法
            • 分销协议
            • 国际贸易
            联系方式 Christian

            写信给 Christian





              阅读 Legalmondo 的隐私政策
              This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

              France: Review and renegotiation of price in case of costs increase

              2022年5月5日

              • 法国
              • 契约
              • 分销协议

              When selling health-related products, the question frequently arises as to which product category, and therefore which regulatory regime, they fall under. This question often arises when distinguishing between food supplements and medicinal products. But in other constellations, too, difficult questions of demarcation arise, which must be answered with a view to legally compliant marketing.

              In a highly interesting case, the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) of Düsseldorf, Germany, recently had to classify a CBD-containing (Cannabidiol) mouth spray that was explicitly advertised by its manufacturer as a “cosmetic” and therefore not suitable for human consumption. The Ingredients of the product were labelled: « Cannabis sativa seed oil, cannabidiol from cannabis extract, tincture or resin, cannabis sativa leaf extract ».

              The Product is additionally also labelled as follows: “Cosmetic oral care spray with hemp leaf extract. » The Instructions for use are: « Spray a maximum of 3 sprays a day into the mouth as desired. Spit out after 30 seconds and do not swallow. »

              A spray of the Product contains 10 mg CBD. This results in a maximum daily dose of 30 mg CBD as specified by the company.

              At the same time, however, it was pointed out that the “consumption” of a spray shot was harmless to health.

              The mouth spray could therefore be consumed like a food, but was declared as a “cosmetic”. This is precisely where the court had to examine whether the prohibition order based on food law was lawful.

              For the definition of cosmetic products Article 2 sentence 4 lit. e) Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 refers to Directive 76/768/EEC. This was replaced by Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009. Cosmetic products are defined in Article 2(1)(a) as follows: “‘cosmetic product’ means any substance or mixture intended to be placed in contact with the external parts of the human body (epidermis, hair system, nails, lips and external genital organs) or with the teeth and the mucous membranes of the oral cavity with a view exclusively or mainly to cleaning them, perfuming them, changing their appearance, protecting them, keeping them in good condition or correcting body odours ”.

              Here too, it is not the composition of the product that is decisive, but its intended purpose, which is to be determined on the basis of objective criteria according to general public opinion based on concrete evidence.

              According to the system of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002, Article 2 sentence 1 first defines foodstuffs in general and then excludes cosmetic products under sentence 4 lit. e). According to the definition in Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009, cosmetic products must have an exclusive or at least predominant cosmetic purpose. It can be concluded from this system that the exclusivity or predominance must be positively established. If it is not possible to determine which purpose predominates, the product is a foodstuff.

              The Düsseldorf Administrative Court had to deal with this question in the aforementioned legal dispute brought by the distributor against an official prohibition order in the form of a so-called general ruling („Allgemeinverfügung“). By notice dated July 11, 2020, the competent authority issued a general ruling prohibiting the marketing of foodstuffs containing “cannabidiol (as ‘CBD isolates’ or ‘hemp extracts enriched with CBD’)” in their urban area. The company, based in this city, offered the mouth spray described above.

              In a ruling dated 25.10.2024 (Courts Ref. : 26 K 2072/23), the court dismissed the company’s claim. The court’s main arguments were :

              1. Classification as food: the CBD spray was correctly classified as food by the authority, as it was reasonable to expect that it could be swallowed despite indications to the contrary. According to an objective perception of the market, there is a now established expectation of an average informed, attentive and reasonable consumer to the effect that CBD oils are intended as “lifestyle” products for oral ingestion, from which consumers hope for positive health effects The labelling as “cosmetic” was refuted by the objective consumer expectations and the nature of the application.
              2. No medicinal product status: Due to the low dosage in this case (max. 30 mg CBD per day), the product was not classified as a functional medicinal product, as there was no sufficiently proven pharmacological effect.
              3. Legal basis of the injunction: The prohibition of the sale of the products by the defendant was based on a general order, which was confirmed as lawful by the court.

              In the ruling, the court emphasizes the objective consumer expectation and clarifies that products cannot be exempted from a different regulatory classification by the authorities or the courts solely by their labelling.

              Conclusion: The decision presented underlines the considerable importance of the “correct” classification of a health product in the respective legal product category. In addition to the classic distinction between foodstuffs (food supplements) and medicinal products, comparable issues also arise with other product types. In this case in the constellation of cosmetics versus food – combined with the special legal component of the use of CBD.

              The author of this article is Matthias Hesshaus

              Commercial agents have specific regulations with rights and obligations that are “mandatory”: those who sign an agency contract cannot derogate from them. Answering whether an influencer can be an agent is essential because, if he or she is an agent, the agent regulations will apply to him or her.

              Let’s take it one step at a time. The influencer we will talk about is the person who, with their actions and comments (blogs, social media accounts, videos, events, or a bit of everything), talks to their followers about the advantages of certain products or services identified with a certain third-party brand. In exchange for this, the influencer is paid.[1]

              A commercial agent is someone who promotes the contracting of others’ products or services, does so in a stable way, and gets paid in return. He or she can also conclude the contract, but this is not essential.

              The law imposes certain obligations and guarantees rights to those signing an agency contract. If the influencer is considered an “agent”, he or she should also have them. And there are several of them: for example, the duration, the notice to be given to terminate the contract, the obligations of the parties… And the most relevant, the right of the agent to receive compensation at the end of the relationship for the clientele that has been generated. If an influencer is an agent, he would also have this right.

              How can an influencer be assessed as an agent? For that we must analyse two things: (a) the contract (and be careful because there is a contract, even if it is not written) and (b) how the parties have behaved.

              The elements that, in my opinion, are most relevant to conclude that an influencer is an agent would be the following:

               

              a) the influencer promotes the contracting of services or the purchase of products and does so independently.

              The contract will indicate what the influencer must do. It will be clearer to consider him as an agent if his comments encourage contracting: for example, if they include a link to the manufacturer’s website, if he offers a discount code, if he allows orders to be placed with him. And if he does so as an independent “professional”, and not as an employee (with a timetable, means, instructions).

              It may be more difficult to consider him as an agent if he limits himself to talking about the benefits of the product or service, appearing in advertising as a brand image, and using a certain product, and speaking well of it. The important thing, in my opinion, is to examine whether the influencer’s activity is aimed at getting people to buy the product he or she is talking about, or whether what he or she is doing is more generic persuasion (appearing in advertising, lending his or her image to a product, carrying out demonstrations of its use), or even whether he or she is only seeking to promote himself or herself as a vehicle for general information (for example, influencers who make comparisons of products without trying to get people to buy one or the other). In the first case (trying to get people to buy the product) it would be easier to consider it as an “agent”, and less so in the other examples.

               

              b) this “promotion” is done in a continuous or stable manner.

              Be careful because this continuity or stability does not mean that the contract has to be of indefinite duration. Rather, it is the opposite of a sporadic relationship. A one-year contract may be sufficient, while several unconnected interventions, even if they last longer, may not be sufficient.

              In this case, influencers who make occasional comments, who intervene with isolated actions, who limit themselves to making comparisons without promoting the purchase of one or the other, and even if all this leads to sales, even if their comments are frequent and even if they can have a great influence on the behavior of their followers, would be excluded as agents.

               

              c) they receive remuneration for their activity.

              An influencer who is remunerated based on sales (e.g., by promoting a discount code, a specific link, or referring to your website for orders) can more easily be considered as an agent. But also, if he or she only receives a fixed amount for their promotion. On the other hand, influencers who do not receive any remuneration from the brand (e.g. someone who talks about the benefits of a product in comparison with others, but without linking it to its promotion) would be excluded.

               

              Conclusion

              The borderline between what qualifies an influencer as an agent and what does not can be very thin, especially because contracts are often not unambiguous and sometimes their services are multiple. The most important thing is to carefully analyse the contract and the parties’ behaviour.

              An influencer could be considered a commercial agent to the extent that his or her activity promotes the contracting of the product (not simply if he or she carries out informative or image work), that it is done on a stable basis (and not merely anecdotal or sporadic) and in exchange for remuneration.

              To assess the specific situation, it is essential to analyse the contract (if it is written, this is easier) and the parties’ behaviour.

              In short, to draw up a contract with an influencer or, if it has already been signed, but you want to conclude it, you will have to pay attention to these elements. As an influencer you may have a strong interest in being considered an agent at the end of the contract and thus be entitled to compensation, while as employer you will prefer the opposite.

              FINAL NOTE. In Spain and at the date of this comment (9 June 2024) I am not aware of any judgement dealing with this issue. My proposal is based on my experience of more than 30 years advising and litigating on agency contracts. On the other hand, and as far as I know, there is at least one judgment in Rome (Italy) dealing with the matter: Tribunale di Roma; Sezione Lavoro 4º, St. 2615 of 4 March 2024; R. G. n. 38445/2022.

              The commercial agent has the right to obtain certain information about the sales of the principal. The Spanish Law on Agency Contracts provides (15.2 LCA) that the agent has the right to demand to see the accounts of the principal in order to verify all matters relating to the commissions due to him. And also, to be provided with the information available to the principal and necessary to verify the amount of such commissions.

              This article is in line with the 1986 Commercial Agents Directive, according to which (12.3) the agent is entitled to demand to be provided with all information at the disposal of the principal, particularly an extract from the books of account, which is necessary to verify the amount of commission due to the agent. This may not be altered to the detriment of the commercial agent by agreement.

              The question is, does this right remain even after the termination of the agency contract? In other words: once the agency contract is terminated, can the agent request the information and documentation mentioned in these articles and is the Principal obliged to provide it?

              In our opinion, the rule does not say anything that limits this right, rather the opposite is to be expected. Therefore, to the extent that there is still any possible commission that may arise from such verification, the answer must be yes. Let us see.

              The right to demand the production of accounts exists so that the agent can verify the amount of commissions. And the agent is entitled to commissions for acts and operations concluded during the term of the contract (art. 12 LCA), but also for acts or operations concluded after the termination of the contract (art. 13 LCA), and for operations not carried out due to circumstances attributable to the principal (art. 17 LCA). In addition, the agent is entitled to have the commission accrued at the time when the act or transaction should have been executed (art. 14 LCA).

              All these transactions can take place after the conclusion of the contract. Consider the usual situation where orders are placed during the contract but are accepted or executed afterwards. To reduce the agent’s right to be informed only during the term of the contract would be to limit his entitlement to the corresponding commission unduly. And it should be borne in mind that the amount of the commissions during the last five years may also influence the calculation of the client (goodwill) indemnity (art. 28 LCA), so that the agent’s interest in knowing them is twofold: what he would receive as commission, and what could increase the basis for future indemnity.

              This has been confirmed, for example, by the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) of Madrid (AAP 227/2017, of 29 June [ECLI:ES:APM:2017:2873A]) which textually states:

              […] art. 15.2 of the Agency Contract Act provides for the right of the agent to demand the exhibition of the Principal’s accounts in the particulars necessary to verify everything relating to the commissions corresponding to him, as well as to be provided with the information available to the Principal and necessary to verify the amount. This does not prevent, […], the agency contract having already been terminated, as this does not imply that commissions would cease to accrue for policies, contracted with the mediation of the agent, which remain in force.

              The question then arises as to whether this right to information is unlimited in time. And here the answer would be in the negative. The limitation of the right to receive information would be linked to the statute of limitations of the right to claim the corresponding commission. If the right to receive the commission were undoubtedly time-barred, it could be argued that it would not be possible to receive information about it. But for such an exception, the statute of limitations must be clear, therefore, taking into account possible interruptions due to claims, even extrajudicial ones. In case of doubt, it will be necessary to recognise the right to demand the information, without prejudice to later invoking and recognising the impossibility of claiming the commission if the right is time-barred. And for this we must consider the limitation period for claiming commissions (in general, three years) and that of the right to claim compensation for clientele (one year).

              In short: it does not seem that the right to receive information and to examine the principal’s documentation is limited by the term of the agency contract; although, on the other hand, it would be appropriate to analyse the possible limitation period for claiming commissions. In the absence of a clear answer to this question, the right to information should, in our opinion, prevail, without prejudice to the fact that the result may not entitle the claim because it is time-barred.

              SUMMARY: In large-scale events such as the Paris Olympics certain companies will attempt to “wildly” associate their brand with the event through a practice called “ambush marketing”, defined by caselaw as “an advertising strategy implemented by a company in order to associate its commercial image with that of an event, and thus to benefit from the media impact of said event, without paying the related rights and without first obtaining the event organizer’s authorization” (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912). A risky and punishable practice, that might sometimes yet be an option yet.

              Key takeaways

              • Ambush marketing might be a punished practice but is not prohibited as such;
              • As a counterpart of their investment, sponsors and official partners benefit from an extensive legal protection against all forms of ambush marketing in the event concerned, through various general texts (counterfeiting, parasitism, intellectual property) or more specific ones (e.g. sport law);
              • The Olympics Games are subject to specific regulations that further strengthen this protection, particularly in terms of intellectual property.
              • But these rights are not absolute, and they are still thin opportunities for astute ambush marketing.

              The protection offered to sponsors and official partners of sporting and cultural events from ambush marketing

              With a budget of over 4 billion euros, the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games are financed mostly by various official partners and sponsors, who in return benefit from a right to use Olympic and Paralympic properties to be able to associate their own brand image and distinctive signs with these events.

              Ambush marketing is not punishable as such under French law, but several scattered texts provide extensive protection against ambush marketing for sponsors and partners of sporting or cultural continental-wide or world-wide events. Indeed, sponsors are legitimately entitled to peacefully enjoy the rights offered to them in return for large-scale investments in events such as the FIFA or rugby World Cups, or the Olympic Games.

              In particular, official sponsors and organizers of such events may invoke:

              • the “classic” protections offered by intellectual property law (trademark law and copyright) in the context of infringement actions based on the French Intellectual Property Code,
              • tort law (parasitism and unfair competition based on article 1240 of the French Civil Code);
              • consumer law (misleading commercial practices) based on the French Consumer Code,
              • but also more specific texts such as the protection of the exploitation rights of sports federations and sports event organizers derived from the events or competitions they organize, as set out in article L.333-1 of the French Sports Code, which gives sports event organizers an exploitation monopoly.

              The following ambush marketing practices were sanctioned on the abovementioned grounds:

              • The use of a tennis competition name and of the trademark associated with it during the sporting event: The organization of online bets, by an online betting operator, on the Roland Garros tournament, using the protected sign and trademark Roland Garros to target the matches on which the bets were organized. The unlawful exploitation of the sporting event, was punished and 400 K€ were allowed as damages, based on article L. 333-1 of the French Sports Code, since only the French Tennis Federation (F.F.T.) owns the right to exploit Roland Garros. The use of the trademark was also punished as counterfeiting (with 300 K€ damages) and parasitism (with 500 K€ damages) (Paris Court of Appeal, Oct. 14, 2009, Case No 08/19179);
              • An advertising campaign taking place during a film festival and reproducing the event’s trademark: The organization, during the Cannes Film Festival, of a digital advertising campaign by a cosmetics brand through the publication on its social networks of videos showing the beauty makeovers of the brand’s muses, in some of which the official poster of the Cannes Film Festival was visible, one of which reproduced the registered trademark of the “Palme d’Or”, was punished on the grounds of copyright infringement and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Judicial Court, Dec. 11, 2020, Case No19/08543);
              • An advertising campaign aimed at falsely claiming to be an official partner of an event: The use, during the Cannes Film Festival, of the slogan “official hairdresser for women” together with the expressions “Cannes” and “Cannes Festival”, and other publications falsely leading the public to believe that the hairdresser was an official partner, to the detriment of the only official hairdresser of the Cannes festival, was punished on the grounds of unfair competition and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912).

              These financial penalties may be combined with injunctions to cease these behaviors, and/or publication in the press under penalty.

              An even greater protection for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games

              The Paris 2024 Olympic Games are also subject to specific regulations.

              Firstly, Article L.141-5 of the French Sports Code, enacted for the benefit of the “Comité national olympique et sportif français” (CNOSF) and the “Comité de l’organisation des Jeux Olympiques et Paralympiques de Paris 2024” (COJOP), protects Olympic signs such as the national Olympic emblems, but also the emblems, the flag, motto and Olympic symbol, Olympic anthem, logo, mascot, slogan and posters of the Olympic Games, the year of the Olympic Games “city + year”, the terms “Jeux Olympiques”, “Olympisme”, “Olympiade”, “JO”, “olympique”, “olympien” and “olympienne”. Under no circumstances may these signs be reproduced or even imitated by third-party companies. The COJOP has also published a guide to the protection of the Olympic trademark, outlining the protected symbols, trademarks and signs, as well as the protection of the official partners of the Olympic Games.

              Secondly, Law no. 2018-202 of March 26, 2018 on the organization of the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games adds even more specific prohibitions, such as the reservation for official sponsors of advertising space located near Olympic venues, or located on the Olympic and Paralympic torch route. This protection is unique in the context of the Olympic Games, but usually unregulated in the context of simple sporting events.

              The following practices, for example, have already been sanctioned on the above-mentioned grounds:

              • Reproduction of a logo imitating the well-known “Olympic” trademark on a clothing collection: The marketing of a collection of clothing, during the 2016 Olympic Games, bearing a logo (five hearts in the colors of the 5 Olympic colors intersecting in the image of the Olympic logo) imitating the Olympic symbol in association with the words “RIO” and “RIO 2016”, was punished on the grounds of parasitism (10 K€ damages) and articles L. 141-5 of the French Sports Code (35 K€) and L. 713-1 of the French Intellectual Property Code (10 K€ damages) (Paris Judicial Court, June 7, 2018, Case No16/10605);
              • The organization of a contest on social networks using protected symbols: During the 2018 Olympic Games in PyeongChang, a car rental company organized an online game inviting Internet users to nominate the athletes they wanted to win a clock radio, associated with the hashtags “#JO2018” (“#OJ2018”), “#Jeuxolympiques” (“#Olympicsgame”) or “C’est parti pour les jeux Olympiques” (“let’s go for the Olympic Games”) without authorization from the CNOSF, owner of these distinctive signs under the 2018 law and article L.141-5 of the French Sport Code and punished on these grounds with 20 K€ damages and of 10 K€ damages for parasitism (Paris Judicial Court, May 29, 2020, n°18/14115).

              These regulations offer official partners greater protection for their investments against ambush marketing practices from non-official sponsors.

              Some marketing operations might be exempted

              An analysis of case law and promotional practices nonetheless reveals the contours of certain advertising practices that could be authorized (i.e. not sanctioned by the above-mentioned texts), provided they are skillfully prepared and presented. Here are a few exemples :

              • Communication of information for advertising purposes: The use of the results of a rugby match and the announcement of a forthcoming match in a newspaper to promote a motor vehicle and its distinctive features was deemed lawful: “France 13 Angleterre 24 – the Fiat 500 congratulates England on its victory and looks forward to seeing the French team on March 9 for France-Italy” (France 13 Angleterre 24 – la Fiat 500 félicite l’Angleterre pour sa victoire et donne rendez-vous à l’équipe de France le 9 mars pour France-Italie) the judges having considered that this publication “merely reproduces a current sporting result, acquired and made public on the front page of the sports newspaper, and refers to a future match also known as already announced by the newspaper in a news article” (Court of cassation, May 20, 2014, Case No 13-12.102).
              • Sponsorship of athletes, including those taking part in Olympic competitions: Subject to compliance with the applicable regulatory framework, particularly as regards models, any company may enter into partnerships with athletes taking part in the Olympic Games, for example by donating clothing bearing the desired logo or brand, which they could wear during their participation in the various events. Athletes may also, under certain conditions, broadcast acknowledgements from their partner (even if unofficial). Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter governs the use of athletes’, coaches’ and officials’ images for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.

              The combined legal and marketing approach to the conception and preparation of the message of such a communication operation is essential to avoid legal proceedings, particularly on the grounds of parasitism; one might therefore legitimately contemplate advertising campaigns, particularly clever, or even malicious ones.

              In this first episode of Legalmondo’s Distribution Talks series, I spoke with Ignacio Alonso, a Madrid-based lawyer with extensive experience in international commercial distribution.

              Main discussion points:

              • in Spain, there is no specific law for distribution agreements, which are governed by the general rules of the Commercial Code;
              • therefore, it is essential to draft a clear and comprehensive contract, which will be the primary source of the parties’ rights and obligations;
              • it is also good to be aware of Spanish case law on commercial distribution, which in some cases applies the law on commercial agency by analogy.
              • the most common issues involving foreign producers distributing in Spain arise at the time of termination of the relationship, mainly because case law grants the terminated distributor an indemnity of clientele or goodwill if similar prerequisites to those in the agency regulations apply.
              • another frequent dispute concerns the adequacy of the notice period for terminating the contract, especially if there is no agreement between the parties: the advice is to follow what the agency regulations stipulate and thus establish a minimum notice period of one month for each year of the contract’s duration, up to 6 months for agreements lasting more than five years;
              • regarding dispute resolution tools, mediation is an option that should be carefully considered because it is quick, inexpensive, and allows a shared solution to be sought flexibly without disrupting the business relationship.
              • if mediation fails, the parties can provide for recourse to arbitration or state court. The choice depends on the case’s specific circumstances, and one factor in favor of jurisdiction is the possibility of appeal, which is excluded in the case of arbitration.

              Go deeper

              Summary

              On 1 June 2022, Regulation EU n. 720/2022, i.e.: the new Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (hereinafter: “VBER”), replaced the previous version (Regulation EU n. 330/2010), expired on 31 May 2022.

              The new VBER and the new vertical guidelines (hereinafter: “Guidelines”) have received the main evidence gathered during the lifetime of the previous VBER and contain some relevant provisions affecting the discipline of all B2B agreements among businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain.

              In this article, we will focus on the impact of the new VBER on sales through digital platforms, listing the main novelties impacting distribution chains, including a platform for marketing products/services.

              The general discipline of vertical agreements

              Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibits all agreements that prevent, restrict, or distort competition within the EU market, listing the main types, e.g.: price fixing; market partitioning; limitations on production/development/investment; unfair terms, etc.

              However, Article 101(3) TFEU exempts from such restrictions the agreements that contribute to improving the EU market, to be identified in a special category Regulation.

              The VBER establishes the category of vertical agreements (i.e., agreements between businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain), determining which of these agreements are exempted from Article 101(1) TFEU prohibition.

              In short, vertical agreements are presumed to be exempted (and therefore valid) if they do not contain so-called “hardcore restrictions” (i.e., severe restrictions of competition, such as an absolute ban on sales in a territory or the manufacturer’s determination of the distributor’s resale price) and if neither party’s market share exceeds 30%.

              The exempted agreements benefit from what has been termed the “safe harbour” of the VBER. In contrast, the others will be subject to the general prohibition of Article 101(1) TFEU unless they can benefit from an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

              The innovations introduced by the new VBER to online platforms

              The first relevant aspect concerns the classification of the platforms, as the European Commission excluded that the online platform generally meets the conditions to be categorized as agency agreements.

              While there have never been doubts concerning platforms that operate by purchasing and reselling products (classic example: Amazon Retail), some have arisen concerning those platforms that merely promote the products of third parties without carrying out the activity of resale (classic example: Amazon Marketplace).

              With this statement, the European Commission wanted to clear the field of doubt, making explicit that intermediation service providers (such as online platforms) qualify as suppliers (as opposed to commercial agents) under the VBER. This reflects the approach of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 (“P2B Regulation”), which has, for the first time, dictated a specific discipline for digital platforms. It provided for a set of rules to create a “fair, transparent, and predictable environment” for smaller businesses and customers” and for the rationale of the Digital Markets Act, banning certain practices used by large platforms acting as “gatekeepers”.

              Therefore, all contracts concluded between manufacturers and platforms (defined as ‘providers of online intermediation services’) are subject to all the restrictions imposed by the VBER. These include the price, the territories to which or the customers to whom the intermediated goods or services may be sold, or the restrictions relating to online advertising and selling.

              Thus, to give an example, the operator of a platform may not impose a fixed or minimum sale price for a transaction promoted through the platform.

              The second most impactful aspect concerns hybrid platforms, i.e., competing in the relevant market to sell intermediated goods or services. Amazon is the most well-known example, as it is a provider of intermediation services (“Amazon Marketplace”), and – at the same time – it distributes the products of those parties (“Amazon Retail”). We have previously explored the distinction between those 2 business models (and the consequences in terms of intellectual property infringement) here.

              The new VBER explicitly does not apply to hybrid platforms. Therefore, the agreements concluded among such platforms and manufacturers are subject to the limitations of the TFEU, as such providers may have the incentive to favour their sales and the ability to influence the outcome of competition between undertakings that use their online intermediation services.

              Those agreements must be assessed individually under Article 101 of the TFEU, as they do not necessarily restrict competition within the meaning of TFEU, or they may fulfil the conditions of an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

              The third very relevant aspect concerns the parity obligations (also referred to as Most Favoured Nation Clauses, or MFNs), i.e., the contract provisions in which a seller (directly or indirectly) agrees to give the buyer the best terms it makes available to any other buyer.

              Indeed, platforms’ contractual terms often contain parity obligation clauses to prevent users from offering their products/services at lower prices or on better conditions on their websites or other platforms.

              The new VBER deals explicitly with parity clauses, making a distinction between clauses whose purpose is to prohibit users of a platform from selling goods or services on more favourable terms through competing platforms (so-called “wide parity clauses”), and clauses that prohibit sales on more favourable terms only in respect of channels operated directly by the users (so-called “narrow parity clauses”).

              Wide parity clauses do not benefit from the VBER exemption; therefore, such obligations must be assessed individually under Article 101(3) TFEU.

              On the other hand, narrow parity clauses continue to benefit from the exemption already granted by the old VBER if they do not exceed the threshold of 30% of the relevant market share set out in Article 3 of the new VBER. However, the new Guidelines warn against using overly narrow parity obligations by online platforms covering a significant share of users, stating that if there is no evidence of pro-competitive effects, the benefit of the block exemption is likely to be withdrawn.

              Impact and takeaways

              The new VBER entered into force on 1 June 2022 and is already applicable to agreements signed after that date. Agreements already in force on 31 May 2022 that satisfy the conditions for exemption under the current VBER but do not satisfy the requirements under the new VBER shall benefit from a one-year transitional period.

              The new regime will be the playing field for all platform-driven sales over the next 12 years (the regulation expires on 31 May 2034). Currently, the rather restrictive novelties on hybrid platforms and parity obligations will likely necessitate substantial revisions to existing trade agreements.

              Here, then, are some tips for managing contracts and relationships with online platforms:

              • the new VBER is the right opportunity to review the existing distribution networks. The revision will have to consider not only the new regulatory limits (e.g., the ban on wide parity clauses) but also the new discipline reserved for hybrid platforms and dual distribution to coordinate the different distribution channels as efficiently as possible, by the stakes set by the new VBER and the Guidelines;
              • platforms are likely to play an even greater role during the next decade; it is, therefore, essential to consider these sales channels from the outset, coordinating them with the other existing ones (retail, direct sales, distributors, etc.) to avoid jeopardizing the marketing of products or services;
              • the European legislator’s attention toward platforms is growing. Looking up from the VBER, one should not forget that they are subject to a multitude of other European regulations, which are gradually regulating the sector and which must be considered when concluding contracts with platforms. The reference is not only to the recent Digital Market Act and P2B Regulation but also to the protection of IP rights on platforms, which – as we have already seen – is still an open issue.

              Summary

              To avoid disputes with important suppliers, it is advisable to plan purchases over the medium and long term and not operate solely on the basis of orders and order confirmations. Planning makes it possible to agree on the duration of the ‘supply agreement, minimum volumes of products to be delivered and delivery schedules, prices, and the conditions under which prices can be varied over time.
              The use of a framework purchase agreement can help avoid future uncertainties and allows various options to be used to manage commodity price fluctuations depending on the type of products , such as automatic price indexing or agreement to renegotiate in the event of commodity fluctuations beyond a certain set tolerance period.

              I read in a press release: “These days, the glass industry is sending wine companies new unilateral contract amendments with price changes of 20%…”

              What can one do to avoid the imposition of price increases by suppliers? 

              • Know your rights and act in an informed manner
              • Plan and organise your supply chain

              Does my supplier have the right to increase prices?

              If contracts have already been concluded, e.g., orders have already been confirmed by the supplier, the answer is often no.

              It is not legitimate to request a price change. It is much less legitimate to communicate it unilaterally, with the threat of cancelling the order or not delivering the goods if the request is not granted.

              What if he tells me it is force majeure?

              That’s wrong: increased costs are not a force majeure but rather an unforeseen excessive onerousness, which hardly happens.

              What if the supplier canceled the order, unilaterally increased the price, or did not deliver the goods?

              He would be in breach of contract and liable to pay damages for violating his contractual obligations.

              How can one avoid a tug-of-war with suppliers?

              The tools are there. You have to know them and use them.

              It is necessary to plan purchases in the medium term, agreeing with suppliers on a schedule in which are set out:

              • the quantities of products to be ordered
              • the delivery terms
              • the durationof the agreement
              • the pricesof the products or raw materials
              • the conditions under which prices can be varied

              There is a very effective instrument to do so: a framework purchase agreement.

              Using a framework purchase agreement, the parties negotiate the above elements, which will be valid for the agreed period.

              Once the agreement is concluded, product orders will follow, governed by the framework agreement, without the need to renegotiate the content of individual deliveries each time.

              For an in-depth discussion of this contract, see this article.

              • “Yes, but my suppliers will never sign it!”

              Why not? Ask them to explain the reason.

              This type of agreement is in the interest of both parties. It allows planning future orders and grants certainty as to whether, when, and how much the parties can change the price.

              In contrast, acting without written agreements forces the parties to operate in an environment of uncertainty. Suppliers can request price increases from one day to the next and refuse supply if the changes are not accepted.

              How are price changes for future supplies regulated?

              Depending on the type of products or services and the raw materials or energy relevant in determining the final price, there are several possibilities.

              • The first option is to index the price automatically. E.g., if the cost of a barrel of Brent oil increases/decreases by 10%, the party concerned is entitled to request a corresponding adjustment of the product’s price in all orders placed as of the following week.
              • An alternative is to provide for a price renegotiation in the event of a fluctuation of the reference commodity. E.g., suppose the LME Aluminium index of the London Stock Exchange increases above a certain threshold. In that case, the interested party may request a price renegotiationfor orders in the period following the increase.

              What if the parties do not agree on new prices?

              It is possible to terminate the contract or refer the price determination to a third party, who would act as arbitrator and set the new prices for future orders.

              Summary

              The framework supply contract is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier) that take place over a certain period of time. This agreement determines the main elements of future contracts such as price, product volumes, delivery terms, technical or quality specifications, and the duration of the agreement.

              The framework contract is useful for ensuring continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a certain product that is essential for planning industrial or commercial activity. While the general terms and conditions of purchase or sale are the rules that apply to all suppliers or customers of the company. The framework contract is advisable to be concluded with essential suppliers for the continuity of business activity, in general or in relation to a particular project.

              What I am talking about in this article:

              • What is the supply framework agreement?
              • What is the function of the supply framework agreement?
              • The difference with the general conditions of sale or purchase
              • When to enter a purchase framework agreement?
              • When is it beneficial to conclude a sales framework agreement?
              • The content of the supply framework agreement
              • Price revision clause and hardship
              • Delivery terms in the supply framework agreement
              • The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts
              • International sales: applicable law and dispute resolution arrangements

              What is a framework supply agreement?

              It is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier), which will take place over a certain period.

              It is therefore referred to as a “framework agreement” because it is an agreement that establishes the rules of a future series of sales and purchase contracts, determining their primary elements (such as the price, the volumes of products to be sold and purchased, the delivery terms of the products, and the duration of the contract).

              After concluding the framework agreement, the parties will exchange orders and order confirmations, entering a series of autonomous sales contracts without re-discussing the covenants already defined in the framework agreement.

              Depending on one’s point of view, this agreement is also called a sales framework agreement (if the seller/supplier uses it) or a purchasing framework agreement (if the customer proposes it).

              What is the function of the framework supply agreement?

              It is helpful to arrange a framework agreement in all cases where the parties intend to proceed with a series of purchases/sales of products over time and are interested in giving stability to the commercial agreement by determining its main elements.

              In particular, the purchase framework agreement may be helpful to a company that wishes to ensure continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a specific product that is essential for planning its industrial or commercial activity (raw material, semi-finished product, component).

              By concluding the framework agreement, the company can obtain, for example, a commitment from the supplier to supply a particular minimum volume of products, at a specific price, with agreed terms and technical specifications, for a certain period.

              This agreement is also beneficial, at the same time, to the seller/supplier, which can plan sales for that period and organize, in turn, the supply chain that enables it to procure the raw materials and components necessary to produce the products.

              What is the difference between a purchase or sales framework agreement and the general terms and conditions?

              Whereas the framework agreement is an agreement that is used with one or more suppliers for a specific product and a certain time frame, determining the essential elements of future contracts, the general purchase (or sales) conditions are the rules that apply to all the company’s suppliers (or customers).

              The first agreement, therefore, is negotiated and defined on a case-by-case basis. At the same time, the general conditions are prepared unilaterally by the company, and the customers or suppliers (depending on whether they are sales or purchase conditions) adhere to and accept that the general conditions apply to the individual order and/or future contracts.

              The two agreements might also co-exist: in that case; it is a good idea to specify which contract should prevail in the event of a discrepancy between the different provisions (usually, this hierarchy is envisaged, ranging from the special to the general: order – order confirmation; framework agreement; general terms and conditions of purchase).

              When is it important to conclude a purchase framework agreement?

              It is beneficial to conclude this agreement when dealing with a mono-supplier or a supplier that would be very difficult to replace if it stopped selling products to the purchasing company.

              The risks one aims to avoid or diminish are so-called stock-outs, i.e., supply interruptions due to the supplier’s lack of availability of products or because the products are available, but the parties cannot agree on the delivery time or sales price.

              Another result that can be achieved is to bind a strategic supplier for a certain period by agreeing that it will reserve an agreed share of production for the buyer on predetermined terms and conditions and avoid competition with offers from third parties interested in the products for the duration of the agreement.

              When is it helpful to conclude a sales framework agreement?

              This agreement allows the seller/supplier to plan sales to a particular customer and thus to plan and organize its production and logistical capacity for the agreed period, avoiding extra costs or delays.

              Planning sales also makes it possible to correctly manage financial obligations and cash flows with a medium-term vision, harmonizing commitments and investments with the sales to one’s customers.

              What is the content of the supply framework agreement?

              There is no standard model of this agreement, which originated from business practice to meet the requirements indicated above.

              Generally, the agreement provides for a fixed period (e.g., 12 months) in which the parties undertake to conclude a series of purchases and sales of products, determining the price and terms of supply and the main covenants of future sales contracts.

              The most important clauses are:

              • the identification of products and technical specifications (often identified in an annex)
              • the minimum/maximum volume of supplies
              • the possible obligation to purchase/sell a minimum/maximum volume of products
              • the schedule of supplies
              • the delivery times
              • the determination of the price and the conditions for its possible modification (see also the next paragraph)
              • impediments to performance (Force Majeure)
              • cases of Hardship
              • penalties for delay or non-performance or for failure to achieve the agreed volumes
              • the hierarchy between the framework agreement and the orders and any other contracts between the parties
              • applicable law and dispute resolution (especially in international agreements)

              How to handle price revision in a supply contract?

              A crucial clause, especially in times of strong fluctuations in the prices of raw materials, transport, and energy, is the price revision clause.

              In the absence of an agreement on this issue, the parties bear the risk of a price increase by undertaking to respect the conditions initially agreed upon; except in exceptional cases (where the fluctuation is strong, affects a short period, and is caused by unforeseeable events), it isn’t straightforward to invoke the supervening excessive onerousness, which allows renegotiating the price, or the contract to be terminated.

              To avoid the uncertainty generated by price fluctuations, it is advisable to agree in the contract on the mechanisms for revising the price (e.g., automatic indexing following the quotation of raw materials). The so-called Hardship or Excessive Onerousness clause establishes what price fluctuation limits are accepted by the parties and what happens if the variations go beyond these limits, providing for the obligation to renegotiate the price or the termination of the contract if no agreement is reached within a certain period.

              How to manage delivery terms in a supply agreement?

              Another fundamental pact in a medium to long-term supply relationship concerns delivery terms. In this case, it is necessary to reconcile the purchaser’s interest in respecting the agreed dates with the supplier’s interest in avoiding claims for damages in the event of a delay, especially in the case of sales requiring intercontinental transport.

              The first thing to be clarified in this regard concerns the nature of delivery deadlines: are they essential or indicative? In the first case, the party affected has the right to terminate (i.e., wind up) the agreement in the event of non-compliance with the term; in the second case, due diligence, information, and timely notification of delays may be required, whereas termination is not a remedy that may be automatically invoked in the event of a delay.

              A useful instrument in this regard is the penalty clause: with this covenant, it is established that for each day/week/month of delay, a sum of money is due by way of damages in favor of the party harmed by the delay.

              If quantified correctly and not excessively, the penalty is helpful for both parties because it makes it possible to predict the damages that may be claimed for the delay, quantifying them in a fair and determined sum. Consequently, the seller is not exposed to claims for damages related to factors beyond his control. At the same time, the buyer can easily calculate the compensation for the delay without the need for further proof.

              The same mechanism, among other things, may be adopted to govern the buyer’s delay in accepting delivery of the goods.

              Finally, it is a good idea to specify the limit of the penalty (e.g.,10 percent of the price of the goods) and a maximum period of grace for the delay, beyond which the party concerned is entitled to terminate the contract by retaining the penalty.

              The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts

              A situation that is often confused with excessive onerousness, but is, in fact, quite different, is that of Force Majeure, i.e., the supervening impossibility of performance of the contractual obligation due to any event beyond the reasonable control of the party affected, which could not have been reasonably foreseen and the effects of which cannot be overcome by reasonable efforts.

              The function of this clause is to set forth clearly when the parties consider that Force Majeure may be invoked, what specific events are included (e.g., a lock-down of the production plant by order of the authority), and what are the consequences for the parties’ obligations (e.g., suspension of the obligation for a certain period, as long as the cause of impossibility of performance lasts, after which the party affected by performance may declare its intention to dissolve the contract).

              If the wording of this clause is general (as is often the case), the risk is that it will be of little use; it is also advisable to check that the regulation of force majeure complies with the law applicable to the contract (here an in-depth analysis indicating the regime provided for by 42 national laws).

              Applicable law and dispute resolution clauses

              Suppose the customer or supplier is based abroad. In that case, several significant differences must be borne in mind: the first is the agreement’s language, which must be intelligible to the foreign party, therefore usually in English or another language familiar to the parties, possibly also in two languages with parallel text.

              The second issue concerns the applicable law, which should be expressly indicated in the agreement. This subject matter is vast, and here we can say that the decision on the applicable law must be made on a case-by-case basis, intentionally: in fact, it is not always convenient to recall the application of the law of one’s own country.

              In most international sales contracts, the 1980 Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”) applies, a uniform law that is balanced, clear, and easy to understand. Therefore, it is not advisable to exclude it.

              Finally, in a supply framework agreement with an international supplier, it is important to identify the method of dispute resolution: no solution fits all. Choosing a country’s jurisdiction is not always the right decision (indeed, it can often prove counterproductive).

              Christophe Hery

              业务领域

              • 代理中介
              • 反垄断
              • 仲裁
              • 分销协议
              • 电子商务
              联系方式 Christophe

              写信给 Christophe





                阅读 Legalmondo 的隐私政策
                This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

                The Distribution of wine in Mexico

                2021年3月7日

                • 墨西哥
                • 分销协议

                When selling health-related products, the question frequently arises as to which product category, and therefore which regulatory regime, they fall under. This question often arises when distinguishing between food supplements and medicinal products. But in other constellations, too, difficult questions of demarcation arise, which must be answered with a view to legally compliant marketing.

                In a highly interesting case, the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) of Düsseldorf, Germany, recently had to classify a CBD-containing (Cannabidiol) mouth spray that was explicitly advertised by its manufacturer as a “cosmetic” and therefore not suitable for human consumption. The Ingredients of the product were labelled: « Cannabis sativa seed oil, cannabidiol from cannabis extract, tincture or resin, cannabis sativa leaf extract ».

                The Product is additionally also labelled as follows: “Cosmetic oral care spray with hemp leaf extract. » The Instructions for use are: « Spray a maximum of 3 sprays a day into the mouth as desired. Spit out after 30 seconds and do not swallow. »

                A spray of the Product contains 10 mg CBD. This results in a maximum daily dose of 30 mg CBD as specified by the company.

                At the same time, however, it was pointed out that the “consumption” of a spray shot was harmless to health.

                The mouth spray could therefore be consumed like a food, but was declared as a “cosmetic”. This is precisely where the court had to examine whether the prohibition order based on food law was lawful.

                For the definition of cosmetic products Article 2 sentence 4 lit. e) Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 refers to Directive 76/768/EEC. This was replaced by Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009. Cosmetic products are defined in Article 2(1)(a) as follows: “‘cosmetic product’ means any substance or mixture intended to be placed in contact with the external parts of the human body (epidermis, hair system, nails, lips and external genital organs) or with the teeth and the mucous membranes of the oral cavity with a view exclusively or mainly to cleaning them, perfuming them, changing their appearance, protecting them, keeping them in good condition or correcting body odours ”.

                Here too, it is not the composition of the product that is decisive, but its intended purpose, which is to be determined on the basis of objective criteria according to general public opinion based on concrete evidence.

                According to the system of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002, Article 2 sentence 1 first defines foodstuffs in general and then excludes cosmetic products under sentence 4 lit. e). According to the definition in Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009, cosmetic products must have an exclusive or at least predominant cosmetic purpose. It can be concluded from this system that the exclusivity or predominance must be positively established. If it is not possible to determine which purpose predominates, the product is a foodstuff.

                The Düsseldorf Administrative Court had to deal with this question in the aforementioned legal dispute brought by the distributor against an official prohibition order in the form of a so-called general ruling („Allgemeinverfügung“). By notice dated July 11, 2020, the competent authority issued a general ruling prohibiting the marketing of foodstuffs containing “cannabidiol (as ‘CBD isolates’ or ‘hemp extracts enriched with CBD’)” in their urban area. The company, based in this city, offered the mouth spray described above.

                In a ruling dated 25.10.2024 (Courts Ref. : 26 K 2072/23), the court dismissed the company’s claim. The court’s main arguments were :

                1. Classification as food: the CBD spray was correctly classified as food by the authority, as it was reasonable to expect that it could be swallowed despite indications to the contrary. According to an objective perception of the market, there is a now established expectation of an average informed, attentive and reasonable consumer to the effect that CBD oils are intended as “lifestyle” products for oral ingestion, from which consumers hope for positive health effects The labelling as “cosmetic” was refuted by the objective consumer expectations and the nature of the application.
                2. No medicinal product status: Due to the low dosage in this case (max. 30 mg CBD per day), the product was not classified as a functional medicinal product, as there was no sufficiently proven pharmacological effect.
                3. Legal basis of the injunction: The prohibition of the sale of the products by the defendant was based on a general order, which was confirmed as lawful by the court.

                In the ruling, the court emphasizes the objective consumer expectation and clarifies that products cannot be exempted from a different regulatory classification by the authorities or the courts solely by their labelling.

                Conclusion: The decision presented underlines the considerable importance of the “correct” classification of a health product in the respective legal product category. In addition to the classic distinction between foodstuffs (food supplements) and medicinal products, comparable issues also arise with other product types. In this case in the constellation of cosmetics versus food – combined with the special legal component of the use of CBD.

                The author of this article is Matthias Hesshaus

                Commercial agents have specific regulations with rights and obligations that are “mandatory”: those who sign an agency contract cannot derogate from them. Answering whether an influencer can be an agent is essential because, if he or she is an agent, the agent regulations will apply to him or her.

                Let’s take it one step at a time. The influencer we will talk about is the person who, with their actions and comments (blogs, social media accounts, videos, events, or a bit of everything), talks to their followers about the advantages of certain products or services identified with a certain third-party brand. In exchange for this, the influencer is paid.[1]

                A commercial agent is someone who promotes the contracting of others’ products or services, does so in a stable way, and gets paid in return. He or she can also conclude the contract, but this is not essential.

                The law imposes certain obligations and guarantees rights to those signing an agency contract. If the influencer is considered an “agent”, he or she should also have them. And there are several of them: for example, the duration, the notice to be given to terminate the contract, the obligations of the parties… And the most relevant, the right of the agent to receive compensation at the end of the relationship for the clientele that has been generated. If an influencer is an agent, he would also have this right.

                How can an influencer be assessed as an agent? For that we must analyse two things: (a) the contract (and be careful because there is a contract, even if it is not written) and (b) how the parties have behaved.

                The elements that, in my opinion, are most relevant to conclude that an influencer is an agent would be the following:

                 

                a) the influencer promotes the contracting of services or the purchase of products and does so independently.

                The contract will indicate what the influencer must do. It will be clearer to consider him as an agent if his comments encourage contracting: for example, if they include a link to the manufacturer’s website, if he offers a discount code, if he allows orders to be placed with him. And if he does so as an independent “professional”, and not as an employee (with a timetable, means, instructions).

                It may be more difficult to consider him as an agent if he limits himself to talking about the benefits of the product or service, appearing in advertising as a brand image, and using a certain product, and speaking well of it. The important thing, in my opinion, is to examine whether the influencer’s activity is aimed at getting people to buy the product he or she is talking about, or whether what he or she is doing is more generic persuasion (appearing in advertising, lending his or her image to a product, carrying out demonstrations of its use), or even whether he or she is only seeking to promote himself or herself as a vehicle for general information (for example, influencers who make comparisons of products without trying to get people to buy one or the other). In the first case (trying to get people to buy the product) it would be easier to consider it as an “agent”, and less so in the other examples.

                 

                b) this “promotion” is done in a continuous or stable manner.

                Be careful because this continuity or stability does not mean that the contract has to be of indefinite duration. Rather, it is the opposite of a sporadic relationship. A one-year contract may be sufficient, while several unconnected interventions, even if they last longer, may not be sufficient.

                In this case, influencers who make occasional comments, who intervene with isolated actions, who limit themselves to making comparisons without promoting the purchase of one or the other, and even if all this leads to sales, even if their comments are frequent and even if they can have a great influence on the behavior of their followers, would be excluded as agents.

                 

                c) they receive remuneration for their activity.

                An influencer who is remunerated based on sales (e.g., by promoting a discount code, a specific link, or referring to your website for orders) can more easily be considered as an agent. But also, if he or she only receives a fixed amount for their promotion. On the other hand, influencers who do not receive any remuneration from the brand (e.g. someone who talks about the benefits of a product in comparison with others, but without linking it to its promotion) would be excluded.

                 

                Conclusion

                The borderline between what qualifies an influencer as an agent and what does not can be very thin, especially because contracts are often not unambiguous and sometimes their services are multiple. The most important thing is to carefully analyse the contract and the parties’ behaviour.

                An influencer could be considered a commercial agent to the extent that his or her activity promotes the contracting of the product (not simply if he or she carries out informative or image work), that it is done on a stable basis (and not merely anecdotal or sporadic) and in exchange for remuneration.

                To assess the specific situation, it is essential to analyse the contract (if it is written, this is easier) and the parties’ behaviour.

                In short, to draw up a contract with an influencer or, if it has already been signed, but you want to conclude it, you will have to pay attention to these elements. As an influencer you may have a strong interest in being considered an agent at the end of the contract and thus be entitled to compensation, while as employer you will prefer the opposite.

                FINAL NOTE. In Spain and at the date of this comment (9 June 2024) I am not aware of any judgement dealing with this issue. My proposal is based on my experience of more than 30 years advising and litigating on agency contracts. On the other hand, and as far as I know, there is at least one judgment in Rome (Italy) dealing with the matter: Tribunale di Roma; Sezione Lavoro 4º, St. 2615 of 4 March 2024; R. G. n. 38445/2022.

                The commercial agent has the right to obtain certain information about the sales of the principal. The Spanish Law on Agency Contracts provides (15.2 LCA) that the agent has the right to demand to see the accounts of the principal in order to verify all matters relating to the commissions due to him. And also, to be provided with the information available to the principal and necessary to verify the amount of such commissions.

                This article is in line with the 1986 Commercial Agents Directive, according to which (12.3) the agent is entitled to demand to be provided with all information at the disposal of the principal, particularly an extract from the books of account, which is necessary to verify the amount of commission due to the agent. This may not be altered to the detriment of the commercial agent by agreement.

                The question is, does this right remain even after the termination of the agency contract? In other words: once the agency contract is terminated, can the agent request the information and documentation mentioned in these articles and is the Principal obliged to provide it?

                In our opinion, the rule does not say anything that limits this right, rather the opposite is to be expected. Therefore, to the extent that there is still any possible commission that may arise from such verification, the answer must be yes. Let us see.

                The right to demand the production of accounts exists so that the agent can verify the amount of commissions. And the agent is entitled to commissions for acts and operations concluded during the term of the contract (art. 12 LCA), but also for acts or operations concluded after the termination of the contract (art. 13 LCA), and for operations not carried out due to circumstances attributable to the principal (art. 17 LCA). In addition, the agent is entitled to have the commission accrued at the time when the act or transaction should have been executed (art. 14 LCA).

                All these transactions can take place after the conclusion of the contract. Consider the usual situation where orders are placed during the contract but are accepted or executed afterwards. To reduce the agent’s right to be informed only during the term of the contract would be to limit his entitlement to the corresponding commission unduly. And it should be borne in mind that the amount of the commissions during the last five years may also influence the calculation of the client (goodwill) indemnity (art. 28 LCA), so that the agent’s interest in knowing them is twofold: what he would receive as commission, and what could increase the basis for future indemnity.

                This has been confirmed, for example, by the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) of Madrid (AAP 227/2017, of 29 June [ECLI:ES:APM:2017:2873A]) which textually states:

                […] art. 15.2 of the Agency Contract Act provides for the right of the agent to demand the exhibition of the Principal’s accounts in the particulars necessary to verify everything relating to the commissions corresponding to him, as well as to be provided with the information available to the Principal and necessary to verify the amount. This does not prevent, […], the agency contract having already been terminated, as this does not imply that commissions would cease to accrue for policies, contracted with the mediation of the agent, which remain in force.

                The question then arises as to whether this right to information is unlimited in time. And here the answer would be in the negative. The limitation of the right to receive information would be linked to the statute of limitations of the right to claim the corresponding commission. If the right to receive the commission were undoubtedly time-barred, it could be argued that it would not be possible to receive information about it. But for such an exception, the statute of limitations must be clear, therefore, taking into account possible interruptions due to claims, even extrajudicial ones. In case of doubt, it will be necessary to recognise the right to demand the information, without prejudice to later invoking and recognising the impossibility of claiming the commission if the right is time-barred. And for this we must consider the limitation period for claiming commissions (in general, three years) and that of the right to claim compensation for clientele (one year).

                In short: it does not seem that the right to receive information and to examine the principal’s documentation is limited by the term of the agency contract; although, on the other hand, it would be appropriate to analyse the possible limitation period for claiming commissions. In the absence of a clear answer to this question, the right to information should, in our opinion, prevail, without prejudice to the fact that the result may not entitle the claim because it is time-barred.

                SUMMARY: In large-scale events such as the Paris Olympics certain companies will attempt to “wildly” associate their brand with the event through a practice called “ambush marketing”, defined by caselaw as “an advertising strategy implemented by a company in order to associate its commercial image with that of an event, and thus to benefit from the media impact of said event, without paying the related rights and without first obtaining the event organizer’s authorization” (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912). A risky and punishable practice, that might sometimes yet be an option yet.

                Key takeaways

                • Ambush marketing might be a punished practice but is not prohibited as such;
                • As a counterpart of their investment, sponsors and official partners benefit from an extensive legal protection against all forms of ambush marketing in the event concerned, through various general texts (counterfeiting, parasitism, intellectual property) or more specific ones (e.g. sport law);
                • The Olympics Games are subject to specific regulations that further strengthen this protection, particularly in terms of intellectual property.
                • But these rights are not absolute, and they are still thin opportunities for astute ambush marketing.

                The protection offered to sponsors and official partners of sporting and cultural events from ambush marketing

                With a budget of over 4 billion euros, the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games are financed mostly by various official partners and sponsors, who in return benefit from a right to use Olympic and Paralympic properties to be able to associate their own brand image and distinctive signs with these events.

                Ambush marketing is not punishable as such under French law, but several scattered texts provide extensive protection against ambush marketing for sponsors and partners of sporting or cultural continental-wide or world-wide events. Indeed, sponsors are legitimately entitled to peacefully enjoy the rights offered to them in return for large-scale investments in events such as the FIFA or rugby World Cups, or the Olympic Games.

                In particular, official sponsors and organizers of such events may invoke:

                • the “classic” protections offered by intellectual property law (trademark law and copyright) in the context of infringement actions based on the French Intellectual Property Code,
                • tort law (parasitism and unfair competition based on article 1240 of the French Civil Code);
                • consumer law (misleading commercial practices) based on the French Consumer Code,
                • but also more specific texts such as the protection of the exploitation rights of sports federations and sports event organizers derived from the events or competitions they organize, as set out in article L.333-1 of the French Sports Code, which gives sports event organizers an exploitation monopoly.

                The following ambush marketing practices were sanctioned on the abovementioned grounds:

                • The use of a tennis competition name and of the trademark associated with it during the sporting event: The organization of online bets, by an online betting operator, on the Roland Garros tournament, using the protected sign and trademark Roland Garros to target the matches on which the bets were organized. The unlawful exploitation of the sporting event, was punished and 400 K€ were allowed as damages, based on article L. 333-1 of the French Sports Code, since only the French Tennis Federation (F.F.T.) owns the right to exploit Roland Garros. The use of the trademark was also punished as counterfeiting (with 300 K€ damages) and parasitism (with 500 K€ damages) (Paris Court of Appeal, Oct. 14, 2009, Case No 08/19179);
                • An advertising campaign taking place during a film festival and reproducing the event’s trademark: The organization, during the Cannes Film Festival, of a digital advertising campaign by a cosmetics brand through the publication on its social networks of videos showing the beauty makeovers of the brand’s muses, in some of which the official poster of the Cannes Film Festival was visible, one of which reproduced the registered trademark of the “Palme d’Or”, was punished on the grounds of copyright infringement and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Judicial Court, Dec. 11, 2020, Case No19/08543);
                • An advertising campaign aimed at falsely claiming to be an official partner of an event: The use, during the Cannes Film Festival, of the slogan “official hairdresser for women” together with the expressions “Cannes” and “Cannes Festival”, and other publications falsely leading the public to believe that the hairdresser was an official partner, to the detriment of the only official hairdresser of the Cannes festival, was punished on the grounds of unfair competition and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912).

                These financial penalties may be combined with injunctions to cease these behaviors, and/or publication in the press under penalty.

                An even greater protection for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games

                The Paris 2024 Olympic Games are also subject to specific regulations.

                Firstly, Article L.141-5 of the French Sports Code, enacted for the benefit of the “Comité national olympique et sportif français” (CNOSF) and the “Comité de l’organisation des Jeux Olympiques et Paralympiques de Paris 2024” (COJOP), protects Olympic signs such as the national Olympic emblems, but also the emblems, the flag, motto and Olympic symbol, Olympic anthem, logo, mascot, slogan and posters of the Olympic Games, the year of the Olympic Games “city + year”, the terms “Jeux Olympiques”, “Olympisme”, “Olympiade”, “JO”, “olympique”, “olympien” and “olympienne”. Under no circumstances may these signs be reproduced or even imitated by third-party companies. The COJOP has also published a guide to the protection of the Olympic trademark, outlining the protected symbols, trademarks and signs, as well as the protection of the official partners of the Olympic Games.

                Secondly, Law no. 2018-202 of March 26, 2018 on the organization of the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games adds even more specific prohibitions, such as the reservation for official sponsors of advertising space located near Olympic venues, or located on the Olympic and Paralympic torch route. This protection is unique in the context of the Olympic Games, but usually unregulated in the context of simple sporting events.

                The following practices, for example, have already been sanctioned on the above-mentioned grounds:

                • Reproduction of a logo imitating the well-known “Olympic” trademark on a clothing collection: The marketing of a collection of clothing, during the 2016 Olympic Games, bearing a logo (five hearts in the colors of the 5 Olympic colors intersecting in the image of the Olympic logo) imitating the Olympic symbol in association with the words “RIO” and “RIO 2016”, was punished on the grounds of parasitism (10 K€ damages) and articles L. 141-5 of the French Sports Code (35 K€) and L. 713-1 of the French Intellectual Property Code (10 K€ damages) (Paris Judicial Court, June 7, 2018, Case No16/10605);
                • The organization of a contest on social networks using protected symbols: During the 2018 Olympic Games in PyeongChang, a car rental company organized an online game inviting Internet users to nominate the athletes they wanted to win a clock radio, associated with the hashtags “#JO2018” (“#OJ2018”), “#Jeuxolympiques” (“#Olympicsgame”) or “C’est parti pour les jeux Olympiques” (“let’s go for the Olympic Games”) without authorization from the CNOSF, owner of these distinctive signs under the 2018 law and article L.141-5 of the French Sport Code and punished on these grounds with 20 K€ damages and of 10 K€ damages for parasitism (Paris Judicial Court, May 29, 2020, n°18/14115).

                These regulations offer official partners greater protection for their investments against ambush marketing practices from non-official sponsors.

                Some marketing operations might be exempted

                An analysis of case law and promotional practices nonetheless reveals the contours of certain advertising practices that could be authorized (i.e. not sanctioned by the above-mentioned texts), provided they are skillfully prepared and presented. Here are a few exemples :

                • Communication of information for advertising purposes: The use of the results of a rugby match and the announcement of a forthcoming match in a newspaper to promote a motor vehicle and its distinctive features was deemed lawful: “France 13 Angleterre 24 – the Fiat 500 congratulates England on its victory and looks forward to seeing the French team on March 9 for France-Italy” (France 13 Angleterre 24 – la Fiat 500 félicite l’Angleterre pour sa victoire et donne rendez-vous à l’équipe de France le 9 mars pour France-Italie) the judges having considered that this publication “merely reproduces a current sporting result, acquired and made public on the front page of the sports newspaper, and refers to a future match also known as already announced by the newspaper in a news article” (Court of cassation, May 20, 2014, Case No 13-12.102).
                • Sponsorship of athletes, including those taking part in Olympic competitions: Subject to compliance with the applicable regulatory framework, particularly as regards models, any company may enter into partnerships with athletes taking part in the Olympic Games, for example by donating clothing bearing the desired logo or brand, which they could wear during their participation in the various events. Athletes may also, under certain conditions, broadcast acknowledgements from their partner (even if unofficial). Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter governs the use of athletes’, coaches’ and officials’ images for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.

                The combined legal and marketing approach to the conception and preparation of the message of such a communication operation is essential to avoid legal proceedings, particularly on the grounds of parasitism; one might therefore legitimately contemplate advertising campaigns, particularly clever, or even malicious ones.

                In this first episode of Legalmondo’s Distribution Talks series, I spoke with Ignacio Alonso, a Madrid-based lawyer with extensive experience in international commercial distribution.

                Main discussion points:

                • in Spain, there is no specific law for distribution agreements, which are governed by the general rules of the Commercial Code;
                • therefore, it is essential to draft a clear and comprehensive contract, which will be the primary source of the parties’ rights and obligations;
                • it is also good to be aware of Spanish case law on commercial distribution, which in some cases applies the law on commercial agency by analogy.
                • the most common issues involving foreign producers distributing in Spain arise at the time of termination of the relationship, mainly because case law grants the terminated distributor an indemnity of clientele or goodwill if similar prerequisites to those in the agency regulations apply.
                • another frequent dispute concerns the adequacy of the notice period for terminating the contract, especially if there is no agreement between the parties: the advice is to follow what the agency regulations stipulate and thus establish a minimum notice period of one month for each year of the contract’s duration, up to 6 months for agreements lasting more than five years;
                • regarding dispute resolution tools, mediation is an option that should be carefully considered because it is quick, inexpensive, and allows a shared solution to be sought flexibly without disrupting the business relationship.
                • if mediation fails, the parties can provide for recourse to arbitration or state court. The choice depends on the case’s specific circumstances, and one factor in favor of jurisdiction is the possibility of appeal, which is excluded in the case of arbitration.

                Go deeper

                Summary

                On 1 June 2022, Regulation EU n. 720/2022, i.e.: the new Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (hereinafter: “VBER”), replaced the previous version (Regulation EU n. 330/2010), expired on 31 May 2022.

                The new VBER and the new vertical guidelines (hereinafter: “Guidelines”) have received the main evidence gathered during the lifetime of the previous VBER and contain some relevant provisions affecting the discipline of all B2B agreements among businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain.

                In this article, we will focus on the impact of the new VBER on sales through digital platforms, listing the main novelties impacting distribution chains, including a platform for marketing products/services.

                The general discipline of vertical agreements

                Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibits all agreements that prevent, restrict, or distort competition within the EU market, listing the main types, e.g.: price fixing; market partitioning; limitations on production/development/investment; unfair terms, etc.

                However, Article 101(3) TFEU exempts from such restrictions the agreements that contribute to improving the EU market, to be identified in a special category Regulation.

                The VBER establishes the category of vertical agreements (i.e., agreements between businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain), determining which of these agreements are exempted from Article 101(1) TFEU prohibition.

                In short, vertical agreements are presumed to be exempted (and therefore valid) if they do not contain so-called “hardcore restrictions” (i.e., severe restrictions of competition, such as an absolute ban on sales in a territory or the manufacturer’s determination of the distributor’s resale price) and if neither party’s market share exceeds 30%.

                The exempted agreements benefit from what has been termed the “safe harbour” of the VBER. In contrast, the others will be subject to the general prohibition of Article 101(1) TFEU unless they can benefit from an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

                The innovations introduced by the new VBER to online platforms

                The first relevant aspect concerns the classification of the platforms, as the European Commission excluded that the online platform generally meets the conditions to be categorized as agency agreements.

                While there have never been doubts concerning platforms that operate by purchasing and reselling products (classic example: Amazon Retail), some have arisen concerning those platforms that merely promote the products of third parties without carrying out the activity of resale (classic example: Amazon Marketplace).

                With this statement, the European Commission wanted to clear the field of doubt, making explicit that intermediation service providers (such as online platforms) qualify as suppliers (as opposed to commercial agents) under the VBER. This reflects the approach of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 (“P2B Regulation”), which has, for the first time, dictated a specific discipline for digital platforms. It provided for a set of rules to create a “fair, transparent, and predictable environment” for smaller businesses and customers” and for the rationale of the Digital Markets Act, banning certain practices used by large platforms acting as “gatekeepers”.

                Therefore, all contracts concluded between manufacturers and platforms (defined as ‘providers of online intermediation services’) are subject to all the restrictions imposed by the VBER. These include the price, the territories to which or the customers to whom the intermediated goods or services may be sold, or the restrictions relating to online advertising and selling.

                Thus, to give an example, the operator of a platform may not impose a fixed or minimum sale price for a transaction promoted through the platform.

                The second most impactful aspect concerns hybrid platforms, i.e., competing in the relevant market to sell intermediated goods or services. Amazon is the most well-known example, as it is a provider of intermediation services (“Amazon Marketplace”), and – at the same time – it distributes the products of those parties (“Amazon Retail”). We have previously explored the distinction between those 2 business models (and the consequences in terms of intellectual property infringement) here.

                The new VBER explicitly does not apply to hybrid platforms. Therefore, the agreements concluded among such platforms and manufacturers are subject to the limitations of the TFEU, as such providers may have the incentive to favour their sales and the ability to influence the outcome of competition between undertakings that use their online intermediation services.

                Those agreements must be assessed individually under Article 101 of the TFEU, as they do not necessarily restrict competition within the meaning of TFEU, or they may fulfil the conditions of an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

                The third very relevant aspect concerns the parity obligations (also referred to as Most Favoured Nation Clauses, or MFNs), i.e., the contract provisions in which a seller (directly or indirectly) agrees to give the buyer the best terms it makes available to any other buyer.

                Indeed, platforms’ contractual terms often contain parity obligation clauses to prevent users from offering their products/services at lower prices or on better conditions on their websites or other platforms.

                The new VBER deals explicitly with parity clauses, making a distinction between clauses whose purpose is to prohibit users of a platform from selling goods or services on more favourable terms through competing platforms (so-called “wide parity clauses”), and clauses that prohibit sales on more favourable terms only in respect of channels operated directly by the users (so-called “narrow parity clauses”).

                Wide parity clauses do not benefit from the VBER exemption; therefore, such obligations must be assessed individually under Article 101(3) TFEU.

                On the other hand, narrow parity clauses continue to benefit from the exemption already granted by the old VBER if they do not exceed the threshold of 30% of the relevant market share set out in Article 3 of the new VBER. However, the new Guidelines warn against using overly narrow parity obligations by online platforms covering a significant share of users, stating that if there is no evidence of pro-competitive effects, the benefit of the block exemption is likely to be withdrawn.

                Impact and takeaways

                The new VBER entered into force on 1 June 2022 and is already applicable to agreements signed after that date. Agreements already in force on 31 May 2022 that satisfy the conditions for exemption under the current VBER but do not satisfy the requirements under the new VBER shall benefit from a one-year transitional period.

                The new regime will be the playing field for all platform-driven sales over the next 12 years (the regulation expires on 31 May 2034). Currently, the rather restrictive novelties on hybrid platforms and parity obligations will likely necessitate substantial revisions to existing trade agreements.

                Here, then, are some tips for managing contracts and relationships with online platforms:

                • the new VBER is the right opportunity to review the existing distribution networks. The revision will have to consider not only the new regulatory limits (e.g., the ban on wide parity clauses) but also the new discipline reserved for hybrid platforms and dual distribution to coordinate the different distribution channels as efficiently as possible, by the stakes set by the new VBER and the Guidelines;
                • platforms are likely to play an even greater role during the next decade; it is, therefore, essential to consider these sales channels from the outset, coordinating them with the other existing ones (retail, direct sales, distributors, etc.) to avoid jeopardizing the marketing of products or services;
                • the European legislator’s attention toward platforms is growing. Looking up from the VBER, one should not forget that they are subject to a multitude of other European regulations, which are gradually regulating the sector and which must be considered when concluding contracts with platforms. The reference is not only to the recent Digital Market Act and P2B Regulation but also to the protection of IP rights on platforms, which – as we have already seen – is still an open issue.

                Summary

                To avoid disputes with important suppliers, it is advisable to plan purchases over the medium and long term and not operate solely on the basis of orders and order confirmations. Planning makes it possible to agree on the duration of the ‘supply agreement, minimum volumes of products to be delivered and delivery schedules, prices, and the conditions under which prices can be varied over time.
                The use of a framework purchase agreement can help avoid future uncertainties and allows various options to be used to manage commodity price fluctuations depending on the type of products , such as automatic price indexing or agreement to renegotiate in the event of commodity fluctuations beyond a certain set tolerance period.

                I read in a press release: “These days, the glass industry is sending wine companies new unilateral contract amendments with price changes of 20%…”

                What can one do to avoid the imposition of price increases by suppliers? 

                • Know your rights and act in an informed manner
                • Plan and organise your supply chain

                Does my supplier have the right to increase prices?

                If contracts have already been concluded, e.g., orders have already been confirmed by the supplier, the answer is often no.

                It is not legitimate to request a price change. It is much less legitimate to communicate it unilaterally, with the threat of cancelling the order or not delivering the goods if the request is not granted.

                What if he tells me it is force majeure?

                That’s wrong: increased costs are not a force majeure but rather an unforeseen excessive onerousness, which hardly happens.

                What if the supplier canceled the order, unilaterally increased the price, or did not deliver the goods?

                He would be in breach of contract and liable to pay damages for violating his contractual obligations.

                How can one avoid a tug-of-war with suppliers?

                The tools are there. You have to know them and use them.

                It is necessary to plan purchases in the medium term, agreeing with suppliers on a schedule in which are set out:

                • the quantities of products to be ordered
                • the delivery terms
                • the durationof the agreement
                • the pricesof the products or raw materials
                • the conditions under which prices can be varied

                There is a very effective instrument to do so: a framework purchase agreement.

                Using a framework purchase agreement, the parties negotiate the above elements, which will be valid for the agreed period.

                Once the agreement is concluded, product orders will follow, governed by the framework agreement, without the need to renegotiate the content of individual deliveries each time.

                For an in-depth discussion of this contract, see this article.

                • “Yes, but my suppliers will never sign it!”

                Why not? Ask them to explain the reason.

                This type of agreement is in the interest of both parties. It allows planning future orders and grants certainty as to whether, when, and how much the parties can change the price.

                In contrast, acting without written agreements forces the parties to operate in an environment of uncertainty. Suppliers can request price increases from one day to the next and refuse supply if the changes are not accepted.

                How are price changes for future supplies regulated?

                Depending on the type of products or services and the raw materials or energy relevant in determining the final price, there are several possibilities.

                • The first option is to index the price automatically. E.g., if the cost of a barrel of Brent oil increases/decreases by 10%, the party concerned is entitled to request a corresponding adjustment of the product’s price in all orders placed as of the following week.
                • An alternative is to provide for a price renegotiation in the event of a fluctuation of the reference commodity. E.g., suppose the LME Aluminium index of the London Stock Exchange increases above a certain threshold. In that case, the interested party may request a price renegotiationfor orders in the period following the increase.

                What if the parties do not agree on new prices?

                It is possible to terminate the contract or refer the price determination to a third party, who would act as arbitrator and set the new prices for future orders.

                Summary

                The framework supply contract is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier) that take place over a certain period of time. This agreement determines the main elements of future contracts such as price, product volumes, delivery terms, technical or quality specifications, and the duration of the agreement.

                The framework contract is useful for ensuring continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a certain product that is essential for planning industrial or commercial activity. While the general terms and conditions of purchase or sale are the rules that apply to all suppliers or customers of the company. The framework contract is advisable to be concluded with essential suppliers for the continuity of business activity, in general or in relation to a particular project.

                What I am talking about in this article:

                • What is the supply framework agreement?
                • What is the function of the supply framework agreement?
                • The difference with the general conditions of sale or purchase
                • When to enter a purchase framework agreement?
                • When is it beneficial to conclude a sales framework agreement?
                • The content of the supply framework agreement
                • Price revision clause and hardship
                • Delivery terms in the supply framework agreement
                • The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts
                • International sales: applicable law and dispute resolution arrangements

                What is a framework supply agreement?

                It is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier), which will take place over a certain period.

                It is therefore referred to as a “framework agreement” because it is an agreement that establishes the rules of a future series of sales and purchase contracts, determining their primary elements (such as the price, the volumes of products to be sold and purchased, the delivery terms of the products, and the duration of the contract).

                After concluding the framework agreement, the parties will exchange orders and order confirmations, entering a series of autonomous sales contracts without re-discussing the covenants already defined in the framework agreement.

                Depending on one’s point of view, this agreement is also called a sales framework agreement (if the seller/supplier uses it) or a purchasing framework agreement (if the customer proposes it).

                What is the function of the framework supply agreement?

                It is helpful to arrange a framework agreement in all cases where the parties intend to proceed with a series of purchases/sales of products over time and are interested in giving stability to the commercial agreement by determining its main elements.

                In particular, the purchase framework agreement may be helpful to a company that wishes to ensure continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a specific product that is essential for planning its industrial or commercial activity (raw material, semi-finished product, component).

                By concluding the framework agreement, the company can obtain, for example, a commitment from the supplier to supply a particular minimum volume of products, at a specific price, with agreed terms and technical specifications, for a certain period.

                This agreement is also beneficial, at the same time, to the seller/supplier, which can plan sales for that period and organize, in turn, the supply chain that enables it to procure the raw materials and components necessary to produce the products.

                What is the difference between a purchase or sales framework agreement and the general terms and conditions?

                Whereas the framework agreement is an agreement that is used with one or more suppliers for a specific product and a certain time frame, determining the essential elements of future contracts, the general purchase (or sales) conditions are the rules that apply to all the company’s suppliers (or customers).

                The first agreement, therefore, is negotiated and defined on a case-by-case basis. At the same time, the general conditions are prepared unilaterally by the company, and the customers or suppliers (depending on whether they are sales or purchase conditions) adhere to and accept that the general conditions apply to the individual order and/or future contracts.

                The two agreements might also co-exist: in that case; it is a good idea to specify which contract should prevail in the event of a discrepancy between the different provisions (usually, this hierarchy is envisaged, ranging from the special to the general: order – order confirmation; framework agreement; general terms and conditions of purchase).

                When is it important to conclude a purchase framework agreement?

                It is beneficial to conclude this agreement when dealing with a mono-supplier or a supplier that would be very difficult to replace if it stopped selling products to the purchasing company.

                The risks one aims to avoid or diminish are so-called stock-outs, i.e., supply interruptions due to the supplier’s lack of availability of products or because the products are available, but the parties cannot agree on the delivery time or sales price.

                Another result that can be achieved is to bind a strategic supplier for a certain period by agreeing that it will reserve an agreed share of production for the buyer on predetermined terms and conditions and avoid competition with offers from third parties interested in the products for the duration of the agreement.

                When is it helpful to conclude a sales framework agreement?

                This agreement allows the seller/supplier to plan sales to a particular customer and thus to plan and organize its production and logistical capacity for the agreed period, avoiding extra costs or delays.

                Planning sales also makes it possible to correctly manage financial obligations and cash flows with a medium-term vision, harmonizing commitments and investments with the sales to one’s customers.

                What is the content of the supply framework agreement?

                There is no standard model of this agreement, which originated from business practice to meet the requirements indicated above.

                Generally, the agreement provides for a fixed period (e.g., 12 months) in which the parties undertake to conclude a series of purchases and sales of products, determining the price and terms of supply and the main covenants of future sales contracts.

                The most important clauses are:

                • the identification of products and technical specifications (often identified in an annex)
                • the minimum/maximum volume of supplies
                • the possible obligation to purchase/sell a minimum/maximum volume of products
                • the schedule of supplies
                • the delivery times
                • the determination of the price and the conditions for its possible modification (see also the next paragraph)
                • impediments to performance (Force Majeure)
                • cases of Hardship
                • penalties for delay or non-performance or for failure to achieve the agreed volumes
                • the hierarchy between the framework agreement and the orders and any other contracts between the parties
                • applicable law and dispute resolution (especially in international agreements)

                How to handle price revision in a supply contract?

                A crucial clause, especially in times of strong fluctuations in the prices of raw materials, transport, and energy, is the price revision clause.

                In the absence of an agreement on this issue, the parties bear the risk of a price increase by undertaking to respect the conditions initially agreed upon; except in exceptional cases (where the fluctuation is strong, affects a short period, and is caused by unforeseeable events), it isn’t straightforward to invoke the supervening excessive onerousness, which allows renegotiating the price, or the contract to be terminated.

                To avoid the uncertainty generated by price fluctuations, it is advisable to agree in the contract on the mechanisms for revising the price (e.g., automatic indexing following the quotation of raw materials). The so-called Hardship or Excessive Onerousness clause establishes what price fluctuation limits are accepted by the parties and what happens if the variations go beyond these limits, providing for the obligation to renegotiate the price or the termination of the contract if no agreement is reached within a certain period.

                How to manage delivery terms in a supply agreement?

                Another fundamental pact in a medium to long-term supply relationship concerns delivery terms. In this case, it is necessary to reconcile the purchaser’s interest in respecting the agreed dates with the supplier’s interest in avoiding claims for damages in the event of a delay, especially in the case of sales requiring intercontinental transport.

                The first thing to be clarified in this regard concerns the nature of delivery deadlines: are they essential or indicative? In the first case, the party affected has the right to terminate (i.e., wind up) the agreement in the event of non-compliance with the term; in the second case, due diligence, information, and timely notification of delays may be required, whereas termination is not a remedy that may be automatically invoked in the event of a delay.

                A useful instrument in this regard is the penalty clause: with this covenant, it is established that for each day/week/month of delay, a sum of money is due by way of damages in favor of the party harmed by the delay.

                If quantified correctly and not excessively, the penalty is helpful for both parties because it makes it possible to predict the damages that may be claimed for the delay, quantifying them in a fair and determined sum. Consequently, the seller is not exposed to claims for damages related to factors beyond his control. At the same time, the buyer can easily calculate the compensation for the delay without the need for further proof.

                The same mechanism, among other things, may be adopted to govern the buyer’s delay in accepting delivery of the goods.

                Finally, it is a good idea to specify the limit of the penalty (e.g.,10 percent of the price of the goods) and a maximum period of grace for the delay, beyond which the party concerned is entitled to terminate the contract by retaining the penalty.

                The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts

                A situation that is often confused with excessive onerousness, but is, in fact, quite different, is that of Force Majeure, i.e., the supervening impossibility of performance of the contractual obligation due to any event beyond the reasonable control of the party affected, which could not have been reasonably foreseen and the effects of which cannot be overcome by reasonable efforts.

                The function of this clause is to set forth clearly when the parties consider that Force Majeure may be invoked, what specific events are included (e.g., a lock-down of the production plant by order of the authority), and what are the consequences for the parties’ obligations (e.g., suspension of the obligation for a certain period, as long as the cause of impossibility of performance lasts, after which the party affected by performance may declare its intention to dissolve the contract).

                If the wording of this clause is general (as is often the case), the risk is that it will be of little use; it is also advisable to check that the regulation of force majeure complies with the law applicable to the contract (here an in-depth analysis indicating the regime provided for by 42 national laws).

                Applicable law and dispute resolution clauses

                Suppose the customer or supplier is based abroad. In that case, several significant differences must be borne in mind: the first is the agreement’s language, which must be intelligible to the foreign party, therefore usually in English or another language familiar to the parties, possibly also in two languages with parallel text.

                The second issue concerns the applicable law, which should be expressly indicated in the agreement. This subject matter is vast, and here we can say that the decision on the applicable law must be made on a case-by-case basis, intentionally: in fact, it is not always convenient to recall the application of the law of one’s own country.

                In most international sales contracts, the 1980 Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”) applies, a uniform law that is balanced, clear, and easy to understand. Therefore, it is not advisable to exclude it.

                Finally, in a supply framework agreement with an international supplier, it is important to identify the method of dispute resolution: no solution fits all. Choosing a country’s jurisdiction is not always the right decision (indeed, it can often prove counterproductive).

                Joaquin Rodriguez

                业务领域

                • 公司法
                • 知识产权
                • 国际贸易
                • 投资
                联系方式 Joaquin

                写信给 Joaquin





                  阅读 Legalmondo 的隐私政策
                  This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

                  Spain | Clientele Compensation for Agents and Distributors

                  2021年2月2日

                  • 西班牙
                  • 机构
                  • 契约
                  • 分销协议

                  When selling health-related products, the question frequently arises as to which product category, and therefore which regulatory regime, they fall under. This question often arises when distinguishing between food supplements and medicinal products. But in other constellations, too, difficult questions of demarcation arise, which must be answered with a view to legally compliant marketing.

                  In a highly interesting case, the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) of Düsseldorf, Germany, recently had to classify a CBD-containing (Cannabidiol) mouth spray that was explicitly advertised by its manufacturer as a “cosmetic” and therefore not suitable for human consumption. The Ingredients of the product were labelled: « Cannabis sativa seed oil, cannabidiol from cannabis extract, tincture or resin, cannabis sativa leaf extract ».

                  The Product is additionally also labelled as follows: “Cosmetic oral care spray with hemp leaf extract. » The Instructions for use are: « Spray a maximum of 3 sprays a day into the mouth as desired. Spit out after 30 seconds and do not swallow. »

                  A spray of the Product contains 10 mg CBD. This results in a maximum daily dose of 30 mg CBD as specified by the company.

                  At the same time, however, it was pointed out that the “consumption” of a spray shot was harmless to health.

                  The mouth spray could therefore be consumed like a food, but was declared as a “cosmetic”. This is precisely where the court had to examine whether the prohibition order based on food law was lawful.

                  For the definition of cosmetic products Article 2 sentence 4 lit. e) Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 refers to Directive 76/768/EEC. This was replaced by Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009. Cosmetic products are defined in Article 2(1)(a) as follows: “‘cosmetic product’ means any substance or mixture intended to be placed in contact with the external parts of the human body (epidermis, hair system, nails, lips and external genital organs) or with the teeth and the mucous membranes of the oral cavity with a view exclusively or mainly to cleaning them, perfuming them, changing their appearance, protecting them, keeping them in good condition or correcting body odours ”.

                  Here too, it is not the composition of the product that is decisive, but its intended purpose, which is to be determined on the basis of objective criteria according to general public opinion based on concrete evidence.

                  According to the system of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002, Article 2 sentence 1 first defines foodstuffs in general and then excludes cosmetic products under sentence 4 lit. e). According to the definition in Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009, cosmetic products must have an exclusive or at least predominant cosmetic purpose. It can be concluded from this system that the exclusivity or predominance must be positively established. If it is not possible to determine which purpose predominates, the product is a foodstuff.

                  The Düsseldorf Administrative Court had to deal with this question in the aforementioned legal dispute brought by the distributor against an official prohibition order in the form of a so-called general ruling („Allgemeinverfügung“). By notice dated July 11, 2020, the competent authority issued a general ruling prohibiting the marketing of foodstuffs containing “cannabidiol (as ‘CBD isolates’ or ‘hemp extracts enriched with CBD’)” in their urban area. The company, based in this city, offered the mouth spray described above.

                  In a ruling dated 25.10.2024 (Courts Ref. : 26 K 2072/23), the court dismissed the company’s claim. The court’s main arguments were :

                  1. Classification as food: the CBD spray was correctly classified as food by the authority, as it was reasonable to expect that it could be swallowed despite indications to the contrary. According to an objective perception of the market, there is a now established expectation of an average informed, attentive and reasonable consumer to the effect that CBD oils are intended as “lifestyle” products for oral ingestion, from which consumers hope for positive health effects The labelling as “cosmetic” was refuted by the objective consumer expectations and the nature of the application.
                  2. No medicinal product status: Due to the low dosage in this case (max. 30 mg CBD per day), the product was not classified as a functional medicinal product, as there was no sufficiently proven pharmacological effect.
                  3. Legal basis of the injunction: The prohibition of the sale of the products by the defendant was based on a general order, which was confirmed as lawful by the court.

                  In the ruling, the court emphasizes the objective consumer expectation and clarifies that products cannot be exempted from a different regulatory classification by the authorities or the courts solely by their labelling.

                  Conclusion: The decision presented underlines the considerable importance of the “correct” classification of a health product in the respective legal product category. In addition to the classic distinction between foodstuffs (food supplements) and medicinal products, comparable issues also arise with other product types. In this case in the constellation of cosmetics versus food – combined with the special legal component of the use of CBD.

                  The author of this article is Matthias Hesshaus

                  Commercial agents have specific regulations with rights and obligations that are “mandatory”: those who sign an agency contract cannot derogate from them. Answering whether an influencer can be an agent is essential because, if he or she is an agent, the agent regulations will apply to him or her.

                  Let’s take it one step at a time. The influencer we will talk about is the person who, with their actions and comments (blogs, social media accounts, videos, events, or a bit of everything), talks to their followers about the advantages of certain products or services identified with a certain third-party brand. In exchange for this, the influencer is paid.[1]

                  A commercial agent is someone who promotes the contracting of others’ products or services, does so in a stable way, and gets paid in return. He or she can also conclude the contract, but this is not essential.

                  The law imposes certain obligations and guarantees rights to those signing an agency contract. If the influencer is considered an “agent”, he or she should also have them. And there are several of them: for example, the duration, the notice to be given to terminate the contract, the obligations of the parties… And the most relevant, the right of the agent to receive compensation at the end of the relationship for the clientele that has been generated. If an influencer is an agent, he would also have this right.

                  How can an influencer be assessed as an agent? For that we must analyse two things: (a) the contract (and be careful because there is a contract, even if it is not written) and (b) how the parties have behaved.

                  The elements that, in my opinion, are most relevant to conclude that an influencer is an agent would be the following:

                   

                  a) the influencer promotes the contracting of services or the purchase of products and does so independently.

                  The contract will indicate what the influencer must do. It will be clearer to consider him as an agent if his comments encourage contracting: for example, if they include a link to the manufacturer’s website, if he offers a discount code, if he allows orders to be placed with him. And if he does so as an independent “professional”, and not as an employee (with a timetable, means, instructions).

                  It may be more difficult to consider him as an agent if he limits himself to talking about the benefits of the product or service, appearing in advertising as a brand image, and using a certain product, and speaking well of it. The important thing, in my opinion, is to examine whether the influencer’s activity is aimed at getting people to buy the product he or she is talking about, or whether what he or she is doing is more generic persuasion (appearing in advertising, lending his or her image to a product, carrying out demonstrations of its use), or even whether he or she is only seeking to promote himself or herself as a vehicle for general information (for example, influencers who make comparisons of products without trying to get people to buy one or the other). In the first case (trying to get people to buy the product) it would be easier to consider it as an “agent”, and less so in the other examples.

                   

                  b) this “promotion” is done in a continuous or stable manner.

                  Be careful because this continuity or stability does not mean that the contract has to be of indefinite duration. Rather, it is the opposite of a sporadic relationship. A one-year contract may be sufficient, while several unconnected interventions, even if they last longer, may not be sufficient.

                  In this case, influencers who make occasional comments, who intervene with isolated actions, who limit themselves to making comparisons without promoting the purchase of one or the other, and even if all this leads to sales, even if their comments are frequent and even if they can have a great influence on the behavior of their followers, would be excluded as agents.

                   

                  c) they receive remuneration for their activity.

                  An influencer who is remunerated based on sales (e.g., by promoting a discount code, a specific link, or referring to your website for orders) can more easily be considered as an agent. But also, if he or she only receives a fixed amount for their promotion. On the other hand, influencers who do not receive any remuneration from the brand (e.g. someone who talks about the benefits of a product in comparison with others, but without linking it to its promotion) would be excluded.

                   

                  Conclusion

                  The borderline between what qualifies an influencer as an agent and what does not can be very thin, especially because contracts are often not unambiguous and sometimes their services are multiple. The most important thing is to carefully analyse the contract and the parties’ behaviour.

                  An influencer could be considered a commercial agent to the extent that his or her activity promotes the contracting of the product (not simply if he or she carries out informative or image work), that it is done on a stable basis (and not merely anecdotal or sporadic) and in exchange for remuneration.

                  To assess the specific situation, it is essential to analyse the contract (if it is written, this is easier) and the parties’ behaviour.

                  In short, to draw up a contract with an influencer or, if it has already been signed, but you want to conclude it, you will have to pay attention to these elements. As an influencer you may have a strong interest in being considered an agent at the end of the contract and thus be entitled to compensation, while as employer you will prefer the opposite.

                  FINAL NOTE. In Spain and at the date of this comment (9 June 2024) I am not aware of any judgement dealing with this issue. My proposal is based on my experience of more than 30 years advising and litigating on agency contracts. On the other hand, and as far as I know, there is at least one judgment in Rome (Italy) dealing with the matter: Tribunale di Roma; Sezione Lavoro 4º, St. 2615 of 4 March 2024; R. G. n. 38445/2022.

                  The commercial agent has the right to obtain certain information about the sales of the principal. The Spanish Law on Agency Contracts provides (15.2 LCA) that the agent has the right to demand to see the accounts of the principal in order to verify all matters relating to the commissions due to him. And also, to be provided with the information available to the principal and necessary to verify the amount of such commissions.

                  This article is in line with the 1986 Commercial Agents Directive, according to which (12.3) the agent is entitled to demand to be provided with all information at the disposal of the principal, particularly an extract from the books of account, which is necessary to verify the amount of commission due to the agent. This may not be altered to the detriment of the commercial agent by agreement.

                  The question is, does this right remain even after the termination of the agency contract? In other words: once the agency contract is terminated, can the agent request the information and documentation mentioned in these articles and is the Principal obliged to provide it?

                  In our opinion, the rule does not say anything that limits this right, rather the opposite is to be expected. Therefore, to the extent that there is still any possible commission that may arise from such verification, the answer must be yes. Let us see.

                  The right to demand the production of accounts exists so that the agent can verify the amount of commissions. And the agent is entitled to commissions for acts and operations concluded during the term of the contract (art. 12 LCA), but also for acts or operations concluded after the termination of the contract (art. 13 LCA), and for operations not carried out due to circumstances attributable to the principal (art. 17 LCA). In addition, the agent is entitled to have the commission accrued at the time when the act or transaction should have been executed (art. 14 LCA).

                  All these transactions can take place after the conclusion of the contract. Consider the usual situation where orders are placed during the contract but are accepted or executed afterwards. To reduce the agent’s right to be informed only during the term of the contract would be to limit his entitlement to the corresponding commission unduly. And it should be borne in mind that the amount of the commissions during the last five years may also influence the calculation of the client (goodwill) indemnity (art. 28 LCA), so that the agent’s interest in knowing them is twofold: what he would receive as commission, and what could increase the basis for future indemnity.

                  This has been confirmed, for example, by the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) of Madrid (AAP 227/2017, of 29 June [ECLI:ES:APM:2017:2873A]) which textually states:

                  […] art. 15.2 of the Agency Contract Act provides for the right of the agent to demand the exhibition of the Principal’s accounts in the particulars necessary to verify everything relating to the commissions corresponding to him, as well as to be provided with the information available to the Principal and necessary to verify the amount. This does not prevent, […], the agency contract having already been terminated, as this does not imply that commissions would cease to accrue for policies, contracted with the mediation of the agent, which remain in force.

                  The question then arises as to whether this right to information is unlimited in time. And here the answer would be in the negative. The limitation of the right to receive information would be linked to the statute of limitations of the right to claim the corresponding commission. If the right to receive the commission were undoubtedly time-barred, it could be argued that it would not be possible to receive information about it. But for such an exception, the statute of limitations must be clear, therefore, taking into account possible interruptions due to claims, even extrajudicial ones. In case of doubt, it will be necessary to recognise the right to demand the information, without prejudice to later invoking and recognising the impossibility of claiming the commission if the right is time-barred. And for this we must consider the limitation period for claiming commissions (in general, three years) and that of the right to claim compensation for clientele (one year).

                  In short: it does not seem that the right to receive information and to examine the principal’s documentation is limited by the term of the agency contract; although, on the other hand, it would be appropriate to analyse the possible limitation period for claiming commissions. In the absence of a clear answer to this question, the right to information should, in our opinion, prevail, without prejudice to the fact that the result may not entitle the claim because it is time-barred.

                  SUMMARY: In large-scale events such as the Paris Olympics certain companies will attempt to “wildly” associate their brand with the event through a practice called “ambush marketing”, defined by caselaw as “an advertising strategy implemented by a company in order to associate its commercial image with that of an event, and thus to benefit from the media impact of said event, without paying the related rights and without first obtaining the event organizer’s authorization” (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912). A risky and punishable practice, that might sometimes yet be an option yet.

                  Key takeaways

                  • Ambush marketing might be a punished practice but is not prohibited as such;
                  • As a counterpart of their investment, sponsors and official partners benefit from an extensive legal protection against all forms of ambush marketing in the event concerned, through various general texts (counterfeiting, parasitism, intellectual property) or more specific ones (e.g. sport law);
                  • The Olympics Games are subject to specific regulations that further strengthen this protection, particularly in terms of intellectual property.
                  • But these rights are not absolute, and they are still thin opportunities for astute ambush marketing.

                  The protection offered to sponsors and official partners of sporting and cultural events from ambush marketing

                  With a budget of over 4 billion euros, the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games are financed mostly by various official partners and sponsors, who in return benefit from a right to use Olympic and Paralympic properties to be able to associate their own brand image and distinctive signs with these events.

                  Ambush marketing is not punishable as such under French law, but several scattered texts provide extensive protection against ambush marketing for sponsors and partners of sporting or cultural continental-wide or world-wide events. Indeed, sponsors are legitimately entitled to peacefully enjoy the rights offered to them in return for large-scale investments in events such as the FIFA or rugby World Cups, or the Olympic Games.

                  In particular, official sponsors and organizers of such events may invoke:

                  • the “classic” protections offered by intellectual property law (trademark law and copyright) in the context of infringement actions based on the French Intellectual Property Code,
                  • tort law (parasitism and unfair competition based on article 1240 of the French Civil Code);
                  • consumer law (misleading commercial practices) based on the French Consumer Code,
                  • but also more specific texts such as the protection of the exploitation rights of sports federations and sports event organizers derived from the events or competitions they organize, as set out in article L.333-1 of the French Sports Code, which gives sports event organizers an exploitation monopoly.

                  The following ambush marketing practices were sanctioned on the abovementioned grounds:

                  • The use of a tennis competition name and of the trademark associated with it during the sporting event: The organization of online bets, by an online betting operator, on the Roland Garros tournament, using the protected sign and trademark Roland Garros to target the matches on which the bets were organized. The unlawful exploitation of the sporting event, was punished and 400 K€ were allowed as damages, based on article L. 333-1 of the French Sports Code, since only the French Tennis Federation (F.F.T.) owns the right to exploit Roland Garros. The use of the trademark was also punished as counterfeiting (with 300 K€ damages) and parasitism (with 500 K€ damages) (Paris Court of Appeal, Oct. 14, 2009, Case No 08/19179);
                  • An advertising campaign taking place during a film festival and reproducing the event’s trademark: The organization, during the Cannes Film Festival, of a digital advertising campaign by a cosmetics brand through the publication on its social networks of videos showing the beauty makeovers of the brand’s muses, in some of which the official poster of the Cannes Film Festival was visible, one of which reproduced the registered trademark of the “Palme d’Or”, was punished on the grounds of copyright infringement and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Judicial Court, Dec. 11, 2020, Case No19/08543);
                  • An advertising campaign aimed at falsely claiming to be an official partner of an event: The use, during the Cannes Film Festival, of the slogan “official hairdresser for women” together with the expressions “Cannes” and “Cannes Festival”, and other publications falsely leading the public to believe that the hairdresser was an official partner, to the detriment of the only official hairdresser of the Cannes festival, was punished on the grounds of unfair competition and parasitism with a 50 K€ indemnity (Paris Court of Appeal, June 8, 2018, Case No 17/12912).

                  These financial penalties may be combined with injunctions to cease these behaviors, and/or publication in the press under penalty.

                  An even greater protection for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games

                  The Paris 2024 Olympic Games are also subject to specific regulations.

                  Firstly, Article L.141-5 of the French Sports Code, enacted for the benefit of the “Comité national olympique et sportif français” (CNOSF) and the “Comité de l’organisation des Jeux Olympiques et Paralympiques de Paris 2024” (COJOP), protects Olympic signs such as the national Olympic emblems, but also the emblems, the flag, motto and Olympic symbol, Olympic anthem, logo, mascot, slogan and posters of the Olympic Games, the year of the Olympic Games “city + year”, the terms “Jeux Olympiques”, “Olympisme”, “Olympiade”, “JO”, “olympique”, “olympien” and “olympienne”. Under no circumstances may these signs be reproduced or even imitated by third-party companies. The COJOP has also published a guide to the protection of the Olympic trademark, outlining the protected symbols, trademarks and signs, as well as the protection of the official partners of the Olympic Games.

                  Secondly, Law no. 2018-202 of March 26, 2018 on the organization of the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games adds even more specific prohibitions, such as the reservation for official sponsors of advertising space located near Olympic venues, or located on the Olympic and Paralympic torch route. This protection is unique in the context of the Olympic Games, but usually unregulated in the context of simple sporting events.

                  The following practices, for example, have already been sanctioned on the above-mentioned grounds:

                  • Reproduction of a logo imitating the well-known “Olympic” trademark on a clothing collection: The marketing of a collection of clothing, during the 2016 Olympic Games, bearing a logo (five hearts in the colors of the 5 Olympic colors intersecting in the image of the Olympic logo) imitating the Olympic symbol in association with the words “RIO” and “RIO 2016”, was punished on the grounds of parasitism (10 K€ damages) and articles L. 141-5 of the French Sports Code (35 K€) and L. 713-1 of the French Intellectual Property Code (10 K€ damages) (Paris Judicial Court, June 7, 2018, Case No16/10605);
                  • The organization of a contest on social networks using protected symbols: During the 2018 Olympic Games in PyeongChang, a car rental company organized an online game inviting Internet users to nominate the athletes they wanted to win a clock radio, associated with the hashtags “#JO2018” (“#OJ2018”), “#Jeuxolympiques” (“#Olympicsgame”) or “C’est parti pour les jeux Olympiques” (“let’s go for the Olympic Games”) without authorization from the CNOSF, owner of these distinctive signs under the 2018 law and article L.141-5 of the French Sport Code and punished on these grounds with 20 K€ damages and of 10 K€ damages for parasitism (Paris Judicial Court, May 29, 2020, n°18/14115).

                  These regulations offer official partners greater protection for their investments against ambush marketing practices from non-official sponsors.

                  Some marketing operations might be exempted

                  An analysis of case law and promotional practices nonetheless reveals the contours of certain advertising practices that could be authorized (i.e. not sanctioned by the above-mentioned texts), provided they are skillfully prepared and presented. Here are a few exemples :

                  • Communication of information for advertising purposes: The use of the results of a rugby match and the announcement of a forthcoming match in a newspaper to promote a motor vehicle and its distinctive features was deemed lawful: “France 13 Angleterre 24 – the Fiat 500 congratulates England on its victory and looks forward to seeing the French team on March 9 for France-Italy” (France 13 Angleterre 24 – la Fiat 500 félicite l’Angleterre pour sa victoire et donne rendez-vous à l’équipe de France le 9 mars pour France-Italie) the judges having considered that this publication “merely reproduces a current sporting result, acquired and made public on the front page of the sports newspaper, and refers to a future match also known as already announced by the newspaper in a news article” (Court of cassation, May 20, 2014, Case No 13-12.102).
                  • Sponsorship of athletes, including those taking part in Olympic competitions: Subject to compliance with the applicable regulatory framework, particularly as regards models, any company may enter into partnerships with athletes taking part in the Olympic Games, for example by donating clothing bearing the desired logo or brand, which they could wear during their participation in the various events. Athletes may also, under certain conditions, broadcast acknowledgements from their partner (even if unofficial). Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter governs the use of athletes’, coaches’ and officials’ images for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.

                  The combined legal and marketing approach to the conception and preparation of the message of such a communication operation is essential to avoid legal proceedings, particularly on the grounds of parasitism; one might therefore legitimately contemplate advertising campaigns, particularly clever, or even malicious ones.

                  In this first episode of Legalmondo’s Distribution Talks series, I spoke with Ignacio Alonso, a Madrid-based lawyer with extensive experience in international commercial distribution.

                  Main discussion points:

                  • in Spain, there is no specific law for distribution agreements, which are governed by the general rules of the Commercial Code;
                  • therefore, it is essential to draft a clear and comprehensive contract, which will be the primary source of the parties’ rights and obligations;
                  • it is also good to be aware of Spanish case law on commercial distribution, which in some cases applies the law on commercial agency by analogy.
                  • the most common issues involving foreign producers distributing in Spain arise at the time of termination of the relationship, mainly because case law grants the terminated distributor an indemnity of clientele or goodwill if similar prerequisites to those in the agency regulations apply.
                  • another frequent dispute concerns the adequacy of the notice period for terminating the contract, especially if there is no agreement between the parties: the advice is to follow what the agency regulations stipulate and thus establish a minimum notice period of one month for each year of the contract’s duration, up to 6 months for agreements lasting more than five years;
                  • regarding dispute resolution tools, mediation is an option that should be carefully considered because it is quick, inexpensive, and allows a shared solution to be sought flexibly without disrupting the business relationship.
                  • if mediation fails, the parties can provide for recourse to arbitration or state court. The choice depends on the case’s specific circumstances, and one factor in favor of jurisdiction is the possibility of appeal, which is excluded in the case of arbitration.

                  Go deeper

                  Summary

                  On 1 June 2022, Regulation EU n. 720/2022, i.e.: the new Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (hereinafter: “VBER”), replaced the previous version (Regulation EU n. 330/2010), expired on 31 May 2022.

                  The new VBER and the new vertical guidelines (hereinafter: “Guidelines”) have received the main evidence gathered during the lifetime of the previous VBER and contain some relevant provisions affecting the discipline of all B2B agreements among businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain.

                  In this article, we will focus on the impact of the new VBER on sales through digital platforms, listing the main novelties impacting distribution chains, including a platform for marketing products/services.

                  The general discipline of vertical agreements

                  Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibits all agreements that prevent, restrict, or distort competition within the EU market, listing the main types, e.g.: price fixing; market partitioning; limitations on production/development/investment; unfair terms, etc.

                  However, Article 101(3) TFEU exempts from such restrictions the agreements that contribute to improving the EU market, to be identified in a special category Regulation.

                  The VBER establishes the category of vertical agreements (i.e., agreements between businesses operating at different levels of the supply chain), determining which of these agreements are exempted from Article 101(1) TFEU prohibition.

                  In short, vertical agreements are presumed to be exempted (and therefore valid) if they do not contain so-called “hardcore restrictions” (i.e., severe restrictions of competition, such as an absolute ban on sales in a territory or the manufacturer’s determination of the distributor’s resale price) and if neither party’s market share exceeds 30%.

                  The exempted agreements benefit from what has been termed the “safe harbour” of the VBER. In contrast, the others will be subject to the general prohibition of Article 101(1) TFEU unless they can benefit from an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

                  The innovations introduced by the new VBER to online platforms

                  The first relevant aspect concerns the classification of the platforms, as the European Commission excluded that the online platform generally meets the conditions to be categorized as agency agreements.

                  While there have never been doubts concerning platforms that operate by purchasing and reselling products (classic example: Amazon Retail), some have arisen concerning those platforms that merely promote the products of third parties without carrying out the activity of resale (classic example: Amazon Marketplace).

                  With this statement, the European Commission wanted to clear the field of doubt, making explicit that intermediation service providers (such as online platforms) qualify as suppliers (as opposed to commercial agents) under the VBER. This reflects the approach of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 (“P2B Regulation”), which has, for the first time, dictated a specific discipline for digital platforms. It provided for a set of rules to create a “fair, transparent, and predictable environment” for smaller businesses and customers” and for the rationale of the Digital Markets Act, banning certain practices used by large platforms acting as “gatekeepers”.

                  Therefore, all contracts concluded between manufacturers and platforms (defined as ‘providers of online intermediation services’) are subject to all the restrictions imposed by the VBER. These include the price, the territories to which or the customers to whom the intermediated goods or services may be sold, or the restrictions relating to online advertising and selling.

                  Thus, to give an example, the operator of a platform may not impose a fixed or minimum sale price for a transaction promoted through the platform.

                  The second most impactful aspect concerns hybrid platforms, i.e., competing in the relevant market to sell intermediated goods or services. Amazon is the most well-known example, as it is a provider of intermediation services (“Amazon Marketplace”), and – at the same time – it distributes the products of those parties (“Amazon Retail”). We have previously explored the distinction between those 2 business models (and the consequences in terms of intellectual property infringement) here.

                  The new VBER explicitly does not apply to hybrid platforms. Therefore, the agreements concluded among such platforms and manufacturers are subject to the limitations of the TFEU, as such providers may have the incentive to favour their sales and the ability to influence the outcome of competition between undertakings that use their online intermediation services.

                  Those agreements must be assessed individually under Article 101 of the TFEU, as they do not necessarily restrict competition within the meaning of TFEU, or they may fulfil the conditions of an individual exemption under Article 101(3) TFUE.

                  The third very relevant aspect concerns the parity obligations (also referred to as Most Favoured Nation Clauses, or MFNs), i.e., the contract provisions in which a seller (directly or indirectly) agrees to give the buyer the best terms it makes available to any other buyer.

                  Indeed, platforms’ contractual terms often contain parity obligation clauses to prevent users from offering their products/services at lower prices or on better conditions on their websites or other platforms.

                  The new VBER deals explicitly with parity clauses, making a distinction between clauses whose purpose is to prohibit users of a platform from selling goods or services on more favourable terms through competing platforms (so-called “wide parity clauses”), and clauses that prohibit sales on more favourable terms only in respect of channels operated directly by the users (so-called “narrow parity clauses”).

                  Wide parity clauses do not benefit from the VBER exemption; therefore, such obligations must be assessed individually under Article 101(3) TFEU.

                  On the other hand, narrow parity clauses continue to benefit from the exemption already granted by the old VBER if they do not exceed the threshold of 30% of the relevant market share set out in Article 3 of the new VBER. However, the new Guidelines warn against using overly narrow parity obligations by online platforms covering a significant share of users, stating that if there is no evidence of pro-competitive effects, the benefit of the block exemption is likely to be withdrawn.

                  Impact and takeaways

                  The new VBER entered into force on 1 June 2022 and is already applicable to agreements signed after that date. Agreements already in force on 31 May 2022 that satisfy the conditions for exemption under the current VBER but do not satisfy the requirements under the new VBER shall benefit from a one-year transitional period.

                  The new regime will be the playing field for all platform-driven sales over the next 12 years (the regulation expires on 31 May 2034). Currently, the rather restrictive novelties on hybrid platforms and parity obligations will likely necessitate substantial revisions to existing trade agreements.

                  Here, then, are some tips for managing contracts and relationships with online platforms:

                  • the new VBER is the right opportunity to review the existing distribution networks. The revision will have to consider not only the new regulatory limits (e.g., the ban on wide parity clauses) but also the new discipline reserved for hybrid platforms and dual distribution to coordinate the different distribution channels as efficiently as possible, by the stakes set by the new VBER and the Guidelines;
                  • platforms are likely to play an even greater role during the next decade; it is, therefore, essential to consider these sales channels from the outset, coordinating them with the other existing ones (retail, direct sales, distributors, etc.) to avoid jeopardizing the marketing of products or services;
                  • the European legislator’s attention toward platforms is growing. Looking up from the VBER, one should not forget that they are subject to a multitude of other European regulations, which are gradually regulating the sector and which must be considered when concluding contracts with platforms. The reference is not only to the recent Digital Market Act and P2B Regulation but also to the protection of IP rights on platforms, which – as we have already seen – is still an open issue.

                  Summary

                  To avoid disputes with important suppliers, it is advisable to plan purchases over the medium and long term and not operate solely on the basis of orders and order confirmations. Planning makes it possible to agree on the duration of the ‘supply agreement, minimum volumes of products to be delivered and delivery schedules, prices, and the conditions under which prices can be varied over time.
                  The use of a framework purchase agreement can help avoid future uncertainties and allows various options to be used to manage commodity price fluctuations depending on the type of products , such as automatic price indexing or agreement to renegotiate in the event of commodity fluctuations beyond a certain set tolerance period.

                  I read in a press release: “These days, the glass industry is sending wine companies new unilateral contract amendments with price changes of 20%…”

                  What can one do to avoid the imposition of price increases by suppliers? 

                  • Know your rights and act in an informed manner
                  • Plan and organise your supply chain

                  Does my supplier have the right to increase prices?

                  If contracts have already been concluded, e.g., orders have already been confirmed by the supplier, the answer is often no.

                  It is not legitimate to request a price change. It is much less legitimate to communicate it unilaterally, with the threat of cancelling the order or not delivering the goods if the request is not granted.

                  What if he tells me it is force majeure?

                  That’s wrong: increased costs are not a force majeure but rather an unforeseen excessive onerousness, which hardly happens.

                  What if the supplier canceled the order, unilaterally increased the price, or did not deliver the goods?

                  He would be in breach of contract and liable to pay damages for violating his contractual obligations.

                  How can one avoid a tug-of-war with suppliers?

                  The tools are there. You have to know them and use them.

                  It is necessary to plan purchases in the medium term, agreeing with suppliers on a schedule in which are set out:

                  • the quantities of products to be ordered
                  • the delivery terms
                  • the durationof the agreement
                  • the pricesof the products or raw materials
                  • the conditions under which prices can be varied

                  There is a very effective instrument to do so: a framework purchase agreement.

                  Using a framework purchase agreement, the parties negotiate the above elements, which will be valid for the agreed period.

                  Once the agreement is concluded, product orders will follow, governed by the framework agreement, without the need to renegotiate the content of individual deliveries each time.

                  For an in-depth discussion of this contract, see this article.

                  • “Yes, but my suppliers will never sign it!”

                  Why not? Ask them to explain the reason.

                  This type of agreement is in the interest of both parties. It allows planning future orders and grants certainty as to whether, when, and how much the parties can change the price.

                  In contrast, acting without written agreements forces the parties to operate in an environment of uncertainty. Suppliers can request price increases from one day to the next and refuse supply if the changes are not accepted.

                  How are price changes for future supplies regulated?

                  Depending on the type of products or services and the raw materials or energy relevant in determining the final price, there are several possibilities.

                  • The first option is to index the price automatically. E.g., if the cost of a barrel of Brent oil increases/decreases by 10%, the party concerned is entitled to request a corresponding adjustment of the product’s price in all orders placed as of the following week.
                  • An alternative is to provide for a price renegotiation in the event of a fluctuation of the reference commodity. E.g., suppose the LME Aluminium index of the London Stock Exchange increases above a certain threshold. In that case, the interested party may request a price renegotiationfor orders in the period following the increase.

                  What if the parties do not agree on new prices?

                  It is possible to terminate the contract or refer the price determination to a third party, who would act as arbitrator and set the new prices for future orders.

                  Summary

                  The framework supply contract is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier) that take place over a certain period of time. This agreement determines the main elements of future contracts such as price, product volumes, delivery terms, technical or quality specifications, and the duration of the agreement.

                  The framework contract is useful for ensuring continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a certain product that is essential for planning industrial or commercial activity. While the general terms and conditions of purchase or sale are the rules that apply to all suppliers or customers of the company. The framework contract is advisable to be concluded with essential suppliers for the continuity of business activity, in general or in relation to a particular project.

                  What I am talking about in this article:

                  • What is the supply framework agreement?
                  • What is the function of the supply framework agreement?
                  • The difference with the general conditions of sale or purchase
                  • When to enter a purchase framework agreement?
                  • When is it beneficial to conclude a sales framework agreement?
                  • The content of the supply framework agreement
                  • Price revision clause and hardship
                  • Delivery terms in the supply framework agreement
                  • The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts
                  • International sales: applicable law and dispute resolution arrangements

                  What is a framework supply agreement?

                  It is an agreement that regulates a series of future sales and purchases between two parties (customer and supplier), which will take place over a certain period.

                  It is therefore referred to as a “framework agreement” because it is an agreement that establishes the rules of a future series of sales and purchase contracts, determining their primary elements (such as the price, the volumes of products to be sold and purchased, the delivery terms of the products, and the duration of the contract).

                  After concluding the framework agreement, the parties will exchange orders and order confirmations, entering a series of autonomous sales contracts without re-discussing the covenants already defined in the framework agreement.

                  Depending on one’s point of view, this agreement is also called a sales framework agreement (if the seller/supplier uses it) or a purchasing framework agreement (if the customer proposes it).

                  What is the function of the framework supply agreement?

                  It is helpful to arrange a framework agreement in all cases where the parties intend to proceed with a series of purchases/sales of products over time and are interested in giving stability to the commercial agreement by determining its main elements.

                  In particular, the purchase framework agreement may be helpful to a company that wishes to ensure continuity of supply from one or more suppliers of a specific product that is essential for planning its industrial or commercial activity (raw material, semi-finished product, component).

                  By concluding the framework agreement, the company can obtain, for example, a commitment from the supplier to supply a particular minimum volume of products, at a specific price, with agreed terms and technical specifications, for a certain period.

                  This agreement is also beneficial, at the same time, to the seller/supplier, which can plan sales for that period and organize, in turn, the supply chain that enables it to procure the raw materials and components necessary to produce the products.

                  What is the difference between a purchase or sales framework agreement and the general terms and conditions?

                  Whereas the framework agreement is an agreement that is used with one or more suppliers for a specific product and a certain time frame, determining the essential elements of future contracts, the general purchase (or sales) conditions are the rules that apply to all the company’s suppliers (or customers).

                  The first agreement, therefore, is negotiated and defined on a case-by-case basis. At the same time, the general conditions are prepared unilaterally by the company, and the customers or suppliers (depending on whether they are sales or purchase conditions) adhere to and accept that the general conditions apply to the individual order and/or future contracts.

                  The two agreements might also co-exist: in that case; it is a good idea to specify which contract should prevail in the event of a discrepancy between the different provisions (usually, this hierarchy is envisaged, ranging from the special to the general: order – order confirmation; framework agreement; general terms and conditions of purchase).

                  When is it important to conclude a purchase framework agreement?

                  It is beneficial to conclude this agreement when dealing with a mono-supplier or a supplier that would be very difficult to replace if it stopped selling products to the purchasing company.

                  The risks one aims to avoid or diminish are so-called stock-outs, i.e., supply interruptions due to the supplier’s lack of availability of products or because the products are available, but the parties cannot agree on the delivery time or sales price.

                  Another result that can be achieved is to bind a strategic supplier for a certain period by agreeing that it will reserve an agreed share of production for the buyer on predetermined terms and conditions and avoid competition with offers from third parties interested in the products for the duration of the agreement.

                  When is it helpful to conclude a sales framework agreement?

                  This agreement allows the seller/supplier to plan sales to a particular customer and thus to plan and organize its production and logistical capacity for the agreed period, avoiding extra costs or delays.

                  Planning sales also makes it possible to correctly manage financial obligations and cash flows with a medium-term vision, harmonizing commitments and investments with the sales to one’s customers.

                  What is the content of the supply framework agreement?

                  There is no standard model of this agreement, which originated from business practice to meet the requirements indicated above.

                  Generally, the agreement provides for a fixed period (e.g., 12 months) in which the parties undertake to conclude a series of purchases and sales of products, determining the price and terms of supply and the main covenants of future sales contracts.

                  The most important clauses are:

                  • the identification of products and technical specifications (often identified in an annex)
                  • the minimum/maximum volume of supplies
                  • the possible obligation to purchase/sell a minimum/maximum volume of products
                  • the schedule of supplies
                  • the delivery times
                  • the determination of the price and the conditions for its possible modification (see also the next paragraph)
                  • impediments to performance (Force Majeure)
                  • cases of Hardship
                  • penalties for delay or non-performance or for failure to achieve the agreed volumes
                  • the hierarchy between the framework agreement and the orders and any other contracts between the parties
                  • applicable law and dispute resolution (especially in international agreements)

                  How to handle price revision in a supply contract?

                  A crucial clause, especially in times of strong fluctuations in the prices of raw materials, transport, and energy, is the price revision clause.

                  In the absence of an agreement on this issue, the parties bear the risk of a price increase by undertaking to respect the conditions initially agreed upon; except in exceptional cases (where the fluctuation is strong, affects a short period, and is caused by unforeseeable events), it isn’t straightforward to invoke the supervening excessive onerousness, which allows renegotiating the price, or the contract to be terminated.

                  To avoid the uncertainty generated by price fluctuations, it is advisable to agree in the contract on the mechanisms for revising the price (e.g., automatic indexing following the quotation of raw materials). The so-called Hardship or Excessive Onerousness clause establishes what price fluctuation limits are accepted by the parties and what happens if the variations go beyond these limits, providing for the obligation to renegotiate the price or the termination of the contract if no agreement is reached within a certain period.

                  How to manage delivery terms in a supply agreement?

                  Another fundamental pact in a medium to long-term supply relationship concerns delivery terms. In this case, it is necessary to reconcile the purchaser’s interest in respecting the agreed dates with the supplier’s interest in avoiding claims for damages in the event of a delay, especially in the case of sales requiring intercontinental transport.

                  The first thing to be clarified in this regard concerns the nature of delivery deadlines: are they essential or indicative? In the first case, the party affected has the right to terminate (i.e., wind up) the agreement in the event of non-compliance with the term; in the second case, due diligence, information, and timely notification of delays may be required, whereas termination is not a remedy that may be automatically invoked in the event of a delay.

                  A useful instrument in this regard is the penalty clause: with this covenant, it is established that for each day/week/month of delay, a sum of money is due by way of damages in favor of the party harmed by the delay.

                  If quantified correctly and not excessively, the penalty is helpful for both parties because it makes it possible to predict the damages that may be claimed for the delay, quantifying them in a fair and determined sum. Consequently, the seller is not exposed to claims for damages related to factors beyond his control. At the same time, the buyer can easily calculate the compensation for the delay without the need for further proof.

                  The same mechanism, among other things, may be adopted to govern the buyer’s delay in accepting delivery of the goods.

                  Finally, it is a good idea to specify the limit of the penalty (e.g.,10 percent of the price of the goods) and a maximum period of grace for the delay, beyond which the party concerned is entitled to terminate the contract by retaining the penalty.

                  The Force Majeure clause in international sales contracts

                  A situation that is often confused with excessive onerousness, but is, in fact, quite different, is that of Force Majeure, i.e., the supervening impossibility of performance of the contractual obligation due to any event beyond the reasonable control of the party affected, which could not have been reasonably foreseen and the effects of which cannot be overcome by reasonable efforts.

                  The function of this clause is to set forth clearly when the parties consider that Force Majeure may be invoked, what specific events are included (e.g., a lock-down of the production plant by order of the authority), and what are the consequences for the parties’ obligations (e.g., suspension of the obligation for a certain period, as long as the cause of impossibility of performance lasts, after which the party affected by performance may declare its intention to dissolve the contract).

                  If the wording of this clause is general (as is often the case), the risk is that it will be of little use; it is also advisable to check that the regulation of force majeure complies with the law applicable to the contract (here an in-depth analysis indicating the regime provided for by 42 national laws).

                  Applicable law and dispute resolution clauses

                  Suppose the customer or supplier is based abroad. In that case, several significant differences must be borne in mind: the first is the agreement’s language, which must be intelligible to the foreign party, therefore usually in English or another language familiar to the parties, possibly also in two languages with parallel text.

                  The second issue concerns the applicable law, which should be expressly indicated in the agreement. This subject matter is vast, and here we can say that the decision on the applicable law must be made on a case-by-case basis, intentionally: in fact, it is not always convenient to recall the application of the law of one’s own country.

                  In most international sales contracts, the 1980 Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”) applies, a uniform law that is balanced, clear, and easy to understand. Therefore, it is not advisable to exclude it.

                  Finally, in a supply framework agreement with an international supplier, it is important to identify the method of dispute resolution: no solution fits all. Choosing a country’s jurisdiction is not always the right decision (indeed, it can often prove counterproductive).

                  Ignacio Alonso

                  业务领域

                  • 代理中介
                  • 公司法
                  • 分销协议
                  • 特许经营
                  联系方式 Ignacio

                  写信给 Ignacio





                    阅读 Legalmondo 的隐私政策
                    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.