Search for cases
CISG-online number
953
Case name
Fondation Le Corbusier et al. v. GrandOptical France et al.
Jurisdiction
France
Court
Tribunal de Grande Instance de Versailles (District Court Versailles)
Chamber
2ème chambre (2nd chamber)
Judges
Adeline de Lataulade (Presiding Judge), Anne Demortière (Judge), Sylvie Castermans-Xerri (Judge), Murielle Foulon (Griffier)
Date of decision
23 November 2004
Case nr./docket nr.
01/08276
Claimants 4
Respondents 5
Seller 1
Buyers 2
Category of goods
82: Furniture and parts thereof; bedding, mattresses, mattress supports, cushions and similar stuffed furnishings
Goods as per contract
Counterfeit Le Corbusier furniture
CISG applicable
yes, Art. 1(1)(a)
CISG applied
yes
(Domestic) law applied in addition
French law
Key CISG provisions applied
Art. 42
Case identifier in the old Albert H. Kritzer Database
041123f1
Comments on this decision 2
Full text of decision 1
by Ulrich G. Schroeter
The present decision was rendered in an intellectual property (IP) infringement case brought by a French foundation (jointly with related IP owners) in order to protect their IP regarding certain designs of furniture developed by the late Swiss-French designer Le Corbusier (1887–1965). After the IP owners had detected that two French optical retail chains were using counterfeit Le Corbusier furniture in their stores, they sued them in the French Tribunal de Grande Instance Versailles for IP violation, and were successful.
The CISG came into play in the proceedings because the Respondents had bought the incriminated furniture from its Spanish manufacturer whom they therefore formally included into the present proceedings, applying for the finding that the seller was in turn liable towards them (so-called "appel en garantie"). In this respect, the Court held that the CISG applied to the relationship between the French buyers and the Spanish seller, and that Art. 42 CISG governed the seller's liability towards the buyers.
However, the Court ruled that the Spanish seller was not liable in the present case, because the buyers had known or could not have been unaware that the goods bought violated a third party's IP rights (cf. Art. 42(2)(a) CISG; see paras. 27–29 of the decision). The Court pointed out that the buyers' positive knowledge was proven by documental evidence presented during the proceedings, and added that the buyers had also consulted professional interior designers when deciding on how to furnish their retail stores, furthermore indicating that they could not have been unaware that they were buying counterfeit Le Corbusier furniture.