Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-pwrkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-05T16:39:15.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - The Paradox of the French Method for Calculating the Compensation of Commercial Agents and the Importance of Conceptualising the Remedial Scheme under Directive 86/653

from Part V - Policing Contracting Behavior

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2013

Larry A. DiMatteo
Affiliation:
University of Florida
Qi Zhou
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield
Severine Saintier
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield
Keith Rowley
Affiliation:
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Get access

Summary

In 1986, the Council of Ministers of the European Union enacted Directive 86/653 on self-employed commercial agents. The Directive was implemented in English law by the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 (thereafter the Agency Regulations) which came into effect on 1 January 1994. The Directive and the Agency Regulations have been held to be in the nature of mandatory law so that they apply where a commercial agent acted in the UK for a Californian principal under a contract governed by Californian law (Ingmar GB Ltd v. Eaton Leonard Inc.).

The Directive is based on the civil law assumption that commercial agents are in need of protection (France and Germany), which is in direct contrast with the traditional English common law position that principals are the ones who deserve protection. When the Agency Regulations came into force, confusion arose because they introduced a level of protection for commercial agents on termination, by way of the civil law concepts of “compensation” and “indemnity”, which are alien to traditional English common law. In implementing the Directive, the UK, alone amongst EU Member States, chose not to opt for one remedy – either “compensation” or “indemnity” – but provided for both to be available and the choice between the two to be made by the parties. When applying the “compensation” option, the UK courts have shown a remarkably methodological approach emphasising the need to conceptualise the notion of “loss” before quantifying it (Lonsdale v. Howard and Hallam Ltd). This is in contrast with France, where the implementation and interpretation of the Directive is consistent with the French legal tradition. The result has been an implementation that appears inconsistent and (perhaps) unduly harsh on the principal.

The aim of this chapter is to study the impact of the differences in implementation among France, Germany and the UK and propose a solution to reconcile such differences. This chapter will first consider the nature and rationale of such remedies to see how they differ from common law concepts. The chapter then critically considers the French system and compare it with the common law courts which appear to have applied such concepts with a, perhaps, unexpected ease. The author offers a solution to unify the damage-related nature of “compensation” and the restitutionary nature of “indemnity” – by viewing the principal-agent relationship as a quasi-joint venture. Using a “reverse un-equitable enrichment approach,” it is possible to argue that the aim of both termination payments under the Directive is to compensate or indemnify the commercial agent for his loss.

Type
Chapter
Information
Commercial Contract Law
Transatlantic Perspectives
, pp. 289 - 308
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×