Analyse
14 juillet 2020

La Cour de cassation a jugé que le non-respect des dispositions anticorruption pouvait permettre au co-contractant de mettre fin aux relations commerciales établies (En anglais)

Bastille Day Newsletter 2020 - Enforcement & Court Decisions

 

On November 20, 2019, the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) ruled that failing to comply with anticorruption provisions included in a contract is a valid ground for terminating a long-established business relationship. The dismissed contractor in breach of compliance requirements is not entitled to claim damages based on the abrupt termination of an established business relationship.

This is the first decision rendered on the topic. This verdict emphasized that the French Supreme Court considered that “compliance law” have become unavoidable.

 

I. The French Supreme Court ruled that a breach of anticorruption compliance and a failure to declare its interests is sufficient to characterize a misconduct enabling to terminate a contractual relationship

A French company specialized in the marketing of medical devices (“EIC”) signed a business agency contract in 2007 with the French subsidiary of the U.S company Biomet, Zimmer Biomet France (“Biomet”).

Under the terms of this contract, EIC “undertook to carry out its activities in compliance with the applicable rules, and in particular acknowledged that it had been informed of the provisions of the former Article L. 4113-6 of the Public Health Code and acknowledged that he had to comply with them”. The company also undertook to subscribe to the Biomet Group’s global anti-corruption policy providing that “all Biomet collaborators will be required to sign a certification of their adherence to the Policy on a regular basis, as well as to satisfactorily participate in training on applicable anti-corruption legislation”[1].

After EIC refusal to renew his adherence and certification to Biomet anti-corruption policy and the failure to declare its links of interests, Biomet terminated the contract without prior notice due to a serious breach of EIC’s contractual compliance obligations. EIC then sued Biomet in front of the French courts for abrupt termination of an established commercial relationship pursuant to article L 442-6 I 5° of the French Commercial Code [2].

For the first time, the French Supreme Court ruled that a breach of anticorruption compliance rules is a valid ground for to terminating a commercial contract for misconduct.

More specifically, the French Supreme Court endorsed the judges of appeal considering that “taking into account the rules set out in the compliance program and the agreement concluded, the failure of [EIC] to comply with its contractual obligations, in that it was likely to result in Biomet’s own liability, was sufficiently serious to justify the termination of the commercial relationship without notice » [3].

 

II. French Supreme Court stance for compliance law

The decision emphasized that the French Supreme Court considered that a company may engage its liability for its business partners failure to comply with anticorruption compliance requirements.

In the case at hand, it is relevant to note that the defendant company signed a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (“DPA”) with the US Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2012 for corruption of public officials. Under this DPA, Biomet agreed to pay a 17 million dollars fine and to strengthen its anticorruption compliance program under a monitorship. The enhancement of the anticorruption compliance program included relationships with third parties, namely business partners. In this context, the non-compliance of its contractor with its anticorruption requirements exposed Biomet to a sanction and a criminal risk.

In addition, IEC failure to declare its interests took place in the context of increased transparency requirements with French anti-gift rules and public health scandals.

In line with the Sapin II law requirements [4] and the French Anti-corruption Agency (“AFA”) guidelines [5] in terms of control over third parties before entering into/during a business relationship, this ruling sends thus a strong message to French businesses : they must maintain a high level of requirements in terms of internal control and third-party controls with respect to the compliance policies. Moreover, and in accordance with the recent publishing of the political procedure circular on the fight against international corruption [6] by French Minister of Justice Nicole Belloubet, the companies must be involved in the fight against corruption and its implementing mechanisms [7].

Contenu similaire

Publication
29 janvier 2026
Les conséquences réglementaires d’un arbitrage frauduleux : leçons de l’affaire TotalEnergies
Navacelle contribue au magazine The Legal Industry Reviews, dans sa section "Regulatory and Sanctions", en présentant un exemple rare de...
Analyse
5 décembre 2025
La future directive 2023/0135 (COD) relative à la lutte contre la corruption
La Délégation des Barreaux de France publie dans son dernier numéro de l'Observateur de Bruxelles un dossier complet consacré à...
Analyse
5 novembre 2025
Une proposition de loi pour moderniser et renforcer les pouvoirs de l’AMF
Le 16 septembre 2025, une proposition de loi a été déposée à l’Assemblée nationale visant à accroître les pouvoirs de...
Publication
14 avril 2026
Les coûts de l’arbitrage : comment les maîtriser et les anticiper ?
Maxime Desplats, dans un article consacré aux coûts de l’arbitrage publié dans la section Arbitrage et Médiation de la Revue...
Revue de presse
10 avril 2026
Revue de presse – Semaine du 10 avril 2026
La revue de presse de cette semaine revient sur l’adoption en première lecture du projet de loi de lutte contre...
Analyse
9 avril 2026
Accords de non-débauchage et pratiques anticoncurrentielles : retour sur la décision du 11 juin 2025...
Dans un contexte de vigilance accrue des autorités de concurrence à l’égard des pratiques affectant les marchés du travail, un...
Revue de presse
3 avril 2026
Revue de presse – Semaine du 3 avril 2026
La revue de presse de cette semaine revient sur l’adoption par le Parlement européen de la première directive anticorruption de...
Événement
3 avril 2026
Le blanchiment d’argent à l’ère de la cryptomonnaie
Conférence sur la lutte contre blanchiment d'argent, présentée aux étudiants du Master 2 Droit pénal économique et de la conformité...
2 min
Analyse
31 mars 2026
CACEIS Bank : Décision de la Commission des sanctions de l’AMF du 17 décembre 2025
Après l’affaire H2O AM qui avait donné lieu à une sanction de cette société de gestion en 2022, l’AMF s’est...
Événement
30 mars 2026
[PAW 2026] La nouvelle géopolitique de l’arbitrage
Conférence sur la nouvelle géopolitique de l'arbitrage, tenue au Tribunal des activités économiques de Paris dans le cadre de la...
2 min
Revue de presse
27 mars 2026
Revue de presse – Semaine du 27 mars 2026
La revue de presse de cette semaine revient sur la publication par la Direction générale de la Sécurité Intérieure d’un...
Revue de presse
20 mars 2026
Revue de presse – Semaine du 16 mars 2026
La revue de presse de cette semaine revient sur l’arrêt de la Cour de cassation relatif à la fraude dite...
Analyse
19 mars 2026
Retour sur la CJIP conclue entre la société HSBC et le PNF pour des faits...
Dans le cadre du dossier CumCum, le PNF et la société HSBC Bank plc ont conclu une convention judiciaire d’intérêt...
Revue de presse
13 mars 2026
Revue de presse – Semaine du 9 mars 2026
La revue de presse de cette semaine revient sur la condamnation de la société-mère du groupe Rocher pour manquement à...
Événement
11 mars 2026
Paris Arbitration Week 2026- La lutte contre les biais et le bruit qui, inconsciemment, affectent...
Navacelle organise le 26 mars 2026, une conférence, dans le cadre de la Paris Arbitration Week (PAW).