Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

France: Beware the impact of corporate restructuring on licences

Trade mark and patent licence agreements generally include provisions regarding the transferability of the agreement to third parties.

Such agreements are frequently concluded in consideration of the person of the licensor or the licensee and include clauses providing that any transfer is subject to the prior consent of either party.

It is also very common that companies and groups of companies be affected by reorganisation or change in capital control which may involve mergers or an equivalent procedure unique to France (called TUP) consisting of the dissolution of a company further to the collection of all the capital shares in hands of its only shareholder. Both procedures involve the complete transfer of all the assets (including IP rights) and debts of the prior company to the surviving company.

Companies are used to thinking about the consequences of the transfer on their IP rights portfolio but rarely about the consequences on their licence agreements.

In this case decided on April 14 2016 by the Paris Court of First Instance, the licensee realised its mistake too late.

Laguiole Licences SAS granted a licence to Koox on the trade marks Laguiole and Bee design for manufacturing and selling cooking devices. It was stated in the agreement, signed on June 1 2011, that the licence was finalised in consideration of the person of the licensee and was not transferable without the prior written consent of the licensor.

On June 22 2012 Koox was dissolved further to the collection of all capital shares in the hands of its only shareholder Der Grune, to which all the assets and debts of Koox were thereby transferred.

Koox did not pay the royalties due further to the agreement and the licensor claimed for this payment, first with Der Grune as successor in title to Koox, and then before the Court.

Der Grune filed the action before the Court for obtaining the termination of the licence agreement, considering it was still the licensee in accordance with the licence granted to Koox.

The Court held that the licence agreement was terminated at the date of dissolution of Koox since it was conditioned by the person of the licensee and since the consent of the licensor was not sought. As a consequence, the agreement was not transferred to Der Grune.

Accordingly Der Grunewas not admitted to act as a licensee by the Court.

However Der Grune acquired the debts of Koox further to the dissolution and the Court held that the unpaid royalties had to be paid by Der Grune to the licensor.

This decision applies to cases of merger of companies as well as to any IP rights.

In addition it should be kept in mind that the company that is no longer a licensee has become an infringer.


Nathalie Rousset

Gevers & Ores41, avenue de FriedlandParis 75008, FranceTel: +33 1 45 00 48 48Fax: +33 1 40 67 95

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Lawyers wish the latest manual had more details on Federal Circuit cases and that training materials for design patent examiners were online
Counsel are eying domestic industry, concurrent PTAB proceedings and heightened scrutiny of cases before institution
Jack Daniel’s has a good chance of winning its dispute over dog toys, but SCOTUS will still want to protect free speech, predict sources
AI users and lawyers discuss why the rulebook for registering AI-generated content may create problems and needs further work
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
A technical effect must still be evident in the original patent filing, the EBoA said in its G2/21 decision today, March 23
Brands should not be deterred from pursuing lookalike producers, and an unfair advantage claim could be the key, say Emma Teichmann and Geoff Steward at Stobbs
Justice Mellor’s highly anticipated ruling surprised SEP owners and reassured implementers that the UK may not be so hostile after all
The England and Wales High Court's judgment comes ahead of a separate hearing concerning one of the patents-in-suit at the EPO
While the rules allow foreign firms to open local offices and offer IP services, a ban on litigation and practising Indian law could mean little will change