The principal then argued that the two agents had committed serious misconduct, which justified the non-payment of any damages.
The Court of Appeals reduced the amount of the indemnities owed, upon finding that the misconduct in question could not be characterized as ‘serious, such that they forfeited all rights to indemnities.’
The Supreme Court has overturned the appellate court’s decision, on the ground that ‘unless the termination of the contract is provoked by his serious misconduct or results from his initiative [without justification],’ the sales agent is entitled to the full amount of the compensatory indemnity.
In other words, the Supreme Court did not accept that a less serious misconduct which does not exclude the right to indemnity, could justify a reduction of its amount.
Didier Ferrier, IDI Country Expert for France.
