When an international dispute is brought before a French court say, the issue prior to processing the application is of course whether that court has territorial jurisdiction. This fact comes the stage where the merits will determine whether there is indeed a fault, injury, etc..
On this subject, the Court of Appeal of Paris ruled last December 2. The decision is interesting because it confirms the jurisdiction of French courts for cases of counterfeiting on eBay.com, English version of the platform.
In 2008, Maceo, a company specializing in clothing, ready-to-wear, had given notice eBay.com (registered in Delaware very paradise), but also Europe eBay (registered in Luxembourg) to stop using one its brands, "April 77" on the entire galaxy online.
Absence of convincing results in summer 2008, Maceo took the direction of the courtroom to get a cessation of acts of infringement of its trademark and compensation for his injury. But before any discussion on the merits, eBay companies raised an objection of lack of territorial jurisdiction.
By order of May 5, 2009, the judge pretrial dismissing eBay, which was then called. In vain. The Court of Appeal of Paris had indeed recalled first that tort law allows the applicant to enter the jurisdiction where the defendant lives, that the place of damage or the one in whose jurisdiction the damage was suffered.
The Court of Appeal will hold a series of criteria "obvious":
The site operated in the United States of America is available on the French territory;
The injury alleged by the company Maceo is "neither virtual, nor possible, but suffered in the territory, can therefore be appreciated by the French judge,
For judges, it is not at all helpful "to search whether there is sufficient connection, substantial or significant between the facts alleged and the French territory," so unimportant that the ads are written in English, " understanding of some basic words in this language is easy for anyone. " She adds, moreover, that "the appellation." Com "does not imply any connection to an audience of a particular country.
Recently, the Justice had also considered an infringement committed on a website of a museum in Chile could be found in our country, even if the site was written in Spanish and published so far from home. This site, the judges explained, "necessarily intended as public art lovers and art historians is, in essence, an international public, open to the world and seeking its documentation beyond borders." "Since it is undisputed that this site is accessible from France, it is noted that the relevant French public is able to accept the alleged infringing content, a circumstance which proves the existence of a link sufficient connection, substantial or significant between wrongful acts and the damage alleged. "
