LexInter | May 25, 2012 | 0 Comments


the obligation to inform and advise the contractor installing a material requires him to draw the attention of the contracting authority to the drawbacks of the product chosen and to the precautions to be taken for its implementation, taking into account the use for which this material is intended Cass. civ. 1 June 20, 1995

 the seller’s obligation to inform and advise his client on the adaptation of the equipment sold for the use for which it is intended exists with regard to the professional buyer to the extent fully appreciated in case where its competence does not give it the means to assess the exact scope of the technical characteristics of the device in question Cass. civ. 1 June 20, 1995

Legally justifies its decision the court of appeal which, to hold the liability of the manufacturer of a product due to the failure to fulfill its obligation to inform, notes that the characteristics of this product, although apparent, could not, for whom not not knowing its particularly complex composition, lead the user to guess the precautions to be taken for its use. Cass. civ. 1, 23 April 1985

The seller of a very recently marketed product has the obligation to give the user, whose level of knowledge is sovereignly appreciated by the merits, all information useful for its implementation. Cass. civ. 1 May 4, 1994

The company T. was not exempt from this obligation because of the quality of professional transporter of MX … since the latter was not in a position to assess the specific technical characteristics required by the use of the material he was considering purchasing Cass. com. January 18, 2000

Any seller of equipment must, so that the sale is concluded with full knowledge of the facts, inquire about the needs of his buyer and then inform the latter of the technical constraints of the item sold and of his ability to achieve the desired goal Cass . com. December 1, 1992

The seller’s duty to advise falls within his area of ​​technical competence. Consequently, a company, which ordered the installation of cameras in the cafeteria of its company, cannot blame the seller of the equipment for a breach of its duty to advise for not having informed it that such an installation was prohibited. by the provisions of the Labor Code.  Cass. civ. January 25, 2002

Avatar of LexInter


Lexinter Law, with a team of dedicated authors who strive to provide you with all the relevant and actionable tips on the legal aspect of your life. Our goal is to educate you so that you can make legal action with ease, or find the right person who can help you with your unique personal legal dilemma. Take care!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Reload Image