Arbitral Digest

Matter

Copernit SPA v Dansk Eternit Fabrik A/S (French Court of Cassation, Second Civil Chamber, judgment of 5 July 2006)

  1. 30 November 2004France

    30 November 2004France

    Judgment of the Caen Court of Appeal dated 30 November 2004

    Caen Court of Appeal

    Decision summary
    The Caen Court of Appeal rejected Copernit SPA's request to extend the expert operations to Dansk Eternit entities because there was no legitimate reason for the requested investigative measure.

    Supporting details

    5 participants
    Private individual
    Contractor responsible for installation
    Copernit SPA
    Dansk Eternit Holding A/S
    DEF 1994/AS
    Caen Court of Appeal

    1 year, 7 months and 5 days later · 582 days

  2. 5 July 2006France

    5 July 2006France

    Judgment of the French Court of Cassation, Second Civil Chamber, dated 5 July 2006

    French Court of Cassation, Second Civil Chamber

    Decision summary
    The Court of Cassation dismissed Copernit SPA's appeal against the refusal to extend the expert operations, ordered Copernit to pay the costs, and ordered it to pay EUR 2,000 to Dansk Eternit Holding A/S and DEF 1994/AS under Article 700 of the French New Code of Civil Procedure.

    Supporting details

    1 authority · 5 participants
    Copernit SPA
    Dansk Eternit Holding A/S
    DEF 1994/AS
    Private individual
    Contractor responsible for installation
    French Court of Cassation, Second Civil Chamber

    Authorities cited

    1
    • French New Code of Civil Procedure
      statute
  3. Date not availableArbitration

    Date not availableArbitration

    Arbitral Award

    Decision summary
    The award approved an agreement under which Copernit SPA accepted sole responsibility for products it manufactured or sold in accordance with the licensed know-how.

    Supporting details

    2 participants
    Copernit SPA
    Dansk Eternit Fabrik A/S

Matter record

Report a correction

Copernit SPA v Dansk Eternit Fabrik A/S (French Court of Cassation, Second Civil Chamber, judgment of 5 July 2006) · Matter