CJEU Upholds Prohibition on the Sale of Luxury Goods via Branded Third-party Internet Platforms
07/12/2017

The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) has just ruled, in the context of a selective distribution system for luxury goods, that contractual clauses prohibiting authorised distributors from selling those goods on branded third-party Internet platforms can be compatible with the EU competition rules.

Such a prohibition must meet three conditions:

- its objective is to preserve the luxury image of the goods;
- it is applied objectively and in a non-discriminatory manner; and 
- the restriction is proportionate and does not go beyond what is necessary.

This judgment will be welcomed by the luxury goods industry, which, in the wake of the European Commission Vertical Guidelines, has been concerned about the negative impact on the image of luxury goods of sales through branded third-party platforms such as eBay or Amazon and an overly rigid application of the EU competition rules in that respect.

Background

Coty Germany sells luxury cosmetics in Germany. In order to preserve the brand's image, the products are made available to consumers solely through a selective distribution network, i.e. authorised distributors. The sales outlets of those authorised distributors must meet certain requirements in terms of  their environment, décor and furnishing. Coty's authorised distributors are allowed to sell online, but only in their own web shops and provided the luxury nature of the products is maintained. They are expressly prohibited from selling online via third-party platforms.

Parfümerie Akzente, one of the Coty’s authorised German distributors, sold Coty products on Amazon in Germany, in violation of the distribution agreement. Coty Germany brought proceedings before a German court against Parfümerie Akzente, with a view to prohibiting it from distributing Coty products on Amazon. The Frankfurt court of appeal referred the case to the CJEU.

Judgment

Referring to Dior v Copad (C 59/08), the CJEU recalled that luxury goods may benefit from a selective distribution system designed primarily to preserve their image. This does not breach EU law, to the extent retailers are selected on the basis of objective qualitative criteria, uniformly applicable to all potential retailers in a non-discriminatory fashion and which do not go beyond what is necessary (paras. 24 and 29).

The Court noted that the quality of luxury goods results not only from their material (or tangible) characteristics but also from their overall allure and prestigious image. An "aura of luxury" is an essential aspect of the goods as it enables consumers to distinguish them from similar goods. Impairment of this aura of luxury is likely to affect the actual quality of the goods (para. 25).

As the clause in question does not prohibit Internet sales in general, only the use of third-party platforms, the Court concluded that the prohibition is an appropriate measure to preserve the prestigious image of luxury cosmetics. The Court added that while the clause restricts a certain type of Internet sale, it does not amount to a general restriction on customers or on passive sales to end users within the meaning of Article 4(b) and (c) of Commission Regulation (EU) No 330/2010 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices (para. 68).

Related : NautaDutilh ( Mr. Tanguy de Haan )

[+ http://www.nautadutilh.com]


Click here to see the ad(s)
All articles European Law

Lastest articles European Law

Status of Uber as Transport Services Company: ECJ Confirmation
09/07/2018

On 10 April 2018, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “ECJ”) delivered a judg...

Status of Uber as Transport Services Company: ECJ Confirmation Read more

In the Picture – July 2018 The public authority is giving your competitor a serious leg up… What ...
04/07/2018

Your company has been going through a rough patch for several months now. Raw material prices keep rising - while at the s...

In the Picture – July 2018 The public authority is giving your competitor a serious leg up… What to do? Read more

“New Deal for Consumers”: European Commission Proposal
03/07/2018

On 11 April 2018, the European Commission (the “Commission”) issued a new package of proposals designed to inc...

“New Deal for Consumers”: European Commission Proposal Read more

Vallen stedenbouwkundige verordeningen nu ook onder de plan-MER-richtlijn?
02/07/2018

In een recent arrest van het Hof van Justitie van 7 juni 2018 (nr. C-671/16) werd geoordeeld dat de Brusselse Stedenbouwku...

Vallen stedenbouwkundige verordeningen nu ook onder de plan-MER-richtlijn? Read more

Lastest articles by Mr. Tanguy de Haan

Crocs killed its own design through public disclosure
20/03/2018

The General Court of the EU confirmed the cancellation of the registration for the famous design of Crocs clogs on the gro...

Read more

Bill to Align Belgian Patent Law to the UPC Agreement
26/12/2017

Although Brexit has called into question the future of the unitary patent and the Unified Patent Court, the Belgian legisl...

Read more

ECJ Rules Against Pro-Sugar Health Claims
20/06/2017

Yesterday (on 13 June 2017), the Court of Justice of the European Union dismissed Dextro Energy’s appeal against the...

Read more

Beware of Tenants Selling Counterfeit Goods!
20/07/2016

In a recent decision, Tommy Hilfiger et al. v Delta Center (C-494/15), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) o...

Read more

LexGO Network