The tribunal de commerce, Paris, will hear oral argument on 26 September in the claim brought by the CNPA as a result of the termination of Chevrolet's dealer agreements. The manufacturer has decided to resist the claim and demand indemnities from CNPA.
The delay is accounted for by the need to put together a tribunal of three judges and a rapporteur for the case, rather than having it heard by only one judge. CNPA considered it important not to have one judge only.
As we previously reported, CNPA base their claim on:
The delay is accounted for by the need to put together a tribunal of three judges and a rapporteur for the case, rather than having it heard by only one judge. CNPA considered it important not to have one judge only.
As we previously reported, CNPA base their claim on:
- The brutality of the announcement of the withdrawal of the brand, reported in the media without any prior information to professionals and no notice period to allow them time to prepare for this event with respect to their customers.
- Disloyalty Chevrolet who knowingly concealed its network for several months the decision of General Motors.
- Non-compliance with the contractual notice period of two years, since the NFPC can prove that Chevrolet no longer fulfills many of its contractual obligations with respect to its network.
The hearing which took place on 30 May has allowed this procedure to enter a new stage but also for the CNPA to obtain the reaction of Chevrolet. Of course, the brand responds point by point to those complaints. But we also learn that compensation would be required to compensate the NFPC Chevrolet of "denigrating campaign by the trade union organization" and would also bring to an earlier halt sales in the franchise.
For the CNPA, the period of nearly four months for argument promotes a more balanced verdict (for 3 judges will have to decide instead of one), but it can also turn against him. "This late date may favor Chevrolet intimidating practices vis-à-vis dealers who still refuse to settle for decreasing financial protocol proposed by the brand," says the NFPC.
In order to avoid lengthy procedures, nearly 70% of the network has already signed an agreement with the brand. "Nobody has an interest in feeding trials with chronic issues that are crucial for distributors. In the interest of the profession, we must find solutions for everyone, "says Jean-Pierre Rinaudo, head of Vulcan group. In particular the amount of compensation has reportedly been revised upwards in many cases to facilitate the signing of agreements.
For the CNPA, the period of nearly four months for argument promotes a more balanced verdict (for 3 judges will have to decide instead of one), but it can also turn against him. "This late date may favor Chevrolet intimidating practices vis-à-vis dealers who still refuse to settle for decreasing financial protocol proposed by the brand," says the NFPC.
In order to avoid lengthy procedures, nearly 70% of the network has already signed an agreement with the brand. "Nobody has an interest in feeding trials with chronic issues that are crucial for distributors. In the interest of the profession, we must find solutions for everyone, "says Jean-Pierre Rinaudo, head of Vulcan group. In particular the amount of compensation has reportedly been revised upwards in many cases to facilitate the signing of agreements.
(Largely translated from an article in L'Argus, 5 June 2014 (http://www.largus.fr/actualite-automobile/affaire-chevrolet-le-constructeur-se-defend-4227379.html) - further material to be added in due course). Additional coverage available at http://news.autoplus.fr/news/1482925/Justice-Tribunal-France-Chevrolet-Concessionnaires, http://www.autoactu.com/chevrolet-contre-le-cnpa---les-plaidoiries-fixees-a-fin-septembre.shtml (subscription required), http://www.autoactu.com/chevrolet-contre-le-cnpa---les-plaidoiries-fixees-a-fin-septembre.shtml.
