In its ruling of 2nd April 2025 (No. RG 23\/05696), the Paris Court of Appeal ordered EMMA to compensate TEDIBER to the amount of \u20ac2 million for economic losses resulting from unfair commercial practices relating to the implementation of an illegal promotional policy.<\/p>\n
Sorgem Evaluation assisted TEDIBER in determining its loss by reconstructing the situation that TEDIBER would have been in had the disputed practices not occurred, based on an analysis of its conversion rate (the proportion of website visitors who become customers and make a purchase).<\/p>\n
The Court of Appeal pointed out that the existence of damage, even if only moral, necessarily follows from an act of unfair competition.<\/p>\n
The ruling states that the misleading commercial practices implemented by EMMA were intended to unfairly capture customers and therefore market share, and that the damage is all the more real given that in online commerce, price \u2013 and therefore promotions \u2013 are of fundamental importance insofar as consumers make their choice from a limited number of references, among which a flagship product is generally highlighted, and do not test the products before purchasing them.<\/p>\n
The Court concluded that, as the price of products and any promotions are decisive factors in consumers’ purchasing decisions, the damage resulting from EMMA’s practices should be analysed as a loss of earnings and not as a loss of opportunity for TEDIBER.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In its ruling of 2nd April 2025 (No. RG 23\/05696), the Paris Court of Appeal ordered EMMA to compensate TEDIBER…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3339,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[54],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3338","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-latest-achievements","wp-sticky"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n