Confexim v Etablissements Benaroya (French Court of Cassation, Second Civil Chamber, 26 January 1994)

Procedural record

1. 18 March 1992France

   18 March 1992France

   Decision of the Paris Court of Appeal dated 18 March 1992

   Paris Court of Appeal

   Decision summary

   The Paris Court of Appeal held that the state courts lacked jurisdiction over Etablissements Benaroya's counterclaim arising from the sale contract because the contract contained an arbitration clause.

   Participants

   Etablissements Benaroya

   Confexim

   Fret service international

   Paris Court of Appeal

   1 year, 10 months and 8 days later · 679 days

2. 26 January 1994France

   26 January 1994France

   Judgment of the French Court of Cassation, Second Civil Chamber dated 26 January 1994

   French Court of Cassation, Second Civil Chamber

   Decision summary

   The Court of Cassation rejected Etablissements Benaroya's appeal and upheld the state courts' lack of jurisdiction over its counterclaim against Confexim under the contract's arbitration clause. It held that Confexim had sued Fret service international for damage caused by the alleged breach of the transitaire's obligations, not to recover part of the sale price, so the argument that Confexim had accepted state-court jurisdiction failed.

   Participants

   Etablissements Benaroya

   Representative

   Me Choucroy (For: Etablissements Benaroya)

   Confexim

   Representative

   Me Capron (For: Confexim)

   Fret service international

   French Court of Cassation, Second Civil Chamber

   Judge

   M. Zakine

   Judge

   M. Chartier

   Judge

   M. Delattre

   Judge

   M. Laplace

   Judge

   Mme Vigroux

   Judge

   M. Buffet

   Judge

   M. Mucchielli

   Advocate General

   M. Sainte-Rose

   Other

   Institutional administrator

   Mme Lagardère

   Authorities cited

   1

   • Article 1458 of the French New Code of Civil Procedure
     statute