In this ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the French Supreme Court on January 31, 2024 (appeal no. 22-24.045), the Court dismisses the main and cross-appeals lodged respectively by Cofape International and Soletanche Bachy France. The dispute concerns the alleged brutal severance of the commercial relationship between the two companies, which were involved in brokerage and insurance policy management.
Brokerage and insurance policies
Commercial relations
Soletanche Bachy had a commercial relationship with Cofape, which managed insurance policies on its behalf and also acted as a broker.
On December 14, 2017, Cofape informed Soletanche Bachy that it was entrusting the management of its group health and provident insurance policies to another company as of January 2018.
In June 2018, Soletanche Bachy appointed a new broker, the company Verlingue, to take over the study and management of its insurance policies, thus terminating the relationship with Cofape. In October 2018, Soletanche Bachy terminated its provident and supplementary health plans with the company GAN, with which Cofape was collaborating.
The notice period in this brokerage case
In March 2019, Cofape sued Soletanche Bachy for damages for the brutal termination of its commercial relationship, arguing that it had not been given sufficient notice given the length of their relationship.
Cofape criticized the Court of Appeal for rejecting its claim for damages, despite a drop in its commissions and sales after the termination. Soletanche Bachy argued that it had suffered moral prejudice as a result of Cofape’s abrupt termination of its insurance brokerage contract management mission, and claimed damages.
The Court’s response
The Court also rejected this argument. In its view, the malfunctions alleged by Soletanche Bachy at the time of the change of manager did not constitute a loss that could be compensated on the basis of sudden termination.
Sufficient notice period and absence of economic dependence
The French Supreme Court confirms the decision of the Paris Court of Appeal. The notice period granted to Cofape was sufficient and appropriate to the nature of the commercial relationship between the parties. Cofape was unable to prove a state of economic dependence on Soletanche Bachy.
No moral prejudice
Soletanche Bachy cannot obtain compensation for non-material damage linked to malfunctions in the transition of insurance policy management. Consequently, the appeals are dismissed, and the parties are left to bear their own costs.
https://frenchrealestatelaw-traesch.fr/Ask your questions using the contact form at the bottom of the page.
(0.00 out of 5)