Case detailB a c k
Article 5 4.
Article 6 1.
|Common name||Decision type||Court decision in appeal|
|Court||Cour d'appel de Montpellier, Chambre correctionnelle 03||Plaintiff(s)||French State|
|Court translation||Court of appeals (Montpellier) Correctional Chamber # 3||Defendant(s)||SARL GRAND SUD AVICOLE, SARL GRAND SUD AVICOLE and SARL NATURE"UF|
|Keywords||advertisement, false information, labelling, misleading advertising, misleading statements|
+ Expand all
The offense of false or misleading advertisements (as referred to in articles L. 121-1-1, L. 121-1 and L. 121-5 of the French Consumer Code) is present when there has been a repeated number of false allegations that could not be considered as mere errors or negligence, but instead as a deliberate intent to mislead the consumer.
A company producing eggs from hens raised in battery was inspected by the French consumer protection authority, which found several violations, including allegations of misleading advertising, particularly in respect of product traceability and quality (claiming the "Label Rouge" quality label).
Do repeated false product claims amount to the offense of false or misleading advertisements?
The court recalled that the repetition of fraudulent practices may in no event be considered as mere error or negligence, but instead amounts to deliberate intent to fraudulently deceive consumers by claiming the "Label Rouge" quality label whereas the eggs in question did not qualify for this label.
Articles L. 115-24, L. 121-1 and L. 121-1-1 of the French Consumer Code were therefore found to be violated. These articles are intended to allow a potential consumer to decide on the quality of a product offered for sale.
|URL Decision||Decision full text|
The claim was denied.
|There is no events for this case.|
|National ID||Common Name||Subject||Country||Link type|
|There is no related cases for this case.|
|There is no Legal Literature for this case.|