Commercial disparagement lawyers in Paris
Domains of expertise > Unfair competition > Disparagement
Statements questioning the quality, safety, compliance or lawfulness of your products can quickly damage your relationships with customers and distributors. As commercial disparagement lawyers in Paris, Bouchara & Avocats assists companies — whether they are the victim or the accused — in characterising the statements, preserving the evidence and defining a strategy, in advisory work as well as in litigation.
The legal characterisation has to be settled quickly. A statement aimed at a product or a service may amount to disparagement, whereas an accusation touching the honour of a company or its director may amount to defamation and be subject to different procedural rules.
To discuss a disparagement situation:
A firm recognised by the leading legal directories for its expertise in intellectual property, digital law and advertising law.
Our commercial disparagement services
Bouchara & Avocats assists companies, brands, in-house legal teams, distribution networks, platforms and online retailers facing statements liable to discredit their products, their services or their business.
Analysing and characterising the statements at issue
The first step is to identify precisely the nature of the statements and what they target.
The strategy depends first of all on the target of the statements, on their content and on their context. Criticism of the reliability of a product, the compliance of a service or the commercial practices of a company does not necessarily fall under the same regime as an accusation of fraud levelled at a company or its director.
Our lawyers examine in particular:
- the exact wording used;
- what is targeted: a product, a service, a business or a person;
- the recipients and the medium;
- whether there is a factual basis;
- how measured the conclusions are;
- the effects already observed on commercial relationships.
That characterisation determines the strategy to be adopted. Commercial disparagement is principally addressed under the general tort liability set out in article 1240 of the French Civil Code. Defamation, by contrast, falls under the specific regime of the Act of 29 July 1881 on freedom of the press.
Preserving evidence of disparagement
Content at issue can be edited or deleted very quickly. It is therefore essential to record its wording, its date, its context and the material needed to identify its author or its circulation.
Depending on the situation, the evidence file may include:
- web pages and their precise URLs;
- social media posts;
- online comments and reviews;
- emails sent to customers or distributors;
- newsletters, press releases or sales brochures;
- videos, podcasts or sponsored content;
- messages exchanged on a professional platform;
- statements from partners who received the remarks;
- requests for explanations, cancellations or terminated orders;
- audience, sharing and engagement statistics.
Screenshots can be useful but are not always sufficient to establish the conditions of circulation on a lasting basis. The firm works with you to determine the preservation and recording measures suited to what is at stake.
Where decisive evidence is held by a third party or is at risk of disappearing, article 145 of the French Code of Civil Procedure allows an application, subject to its conditions, for a pre-trial measure to preserve or establish that evidence.
Putting a stop to a disparagement campaign
Once the file has been assembled, several routes can be considered depending on the urgency and the reach of the content:
- a cease-and-desist letter to the author;
- a takedown or correction request;
- a report to the platform concerned;
- negotiating an undertaking not to repeat the statements;
- interim relief proceedings;
- a claim in tort.
A public response is not always advisable. It can draw attention to content that is still barely visible, or lead the company to make questionable accusations of its own. The choice between a confidential response, a corrective communication and court proceedings must therefore take account of how far the statements have actually spread.
Articles 835 and 873 of the French Code of Civil Procedure allow the interim relief judge, depending on the court with jurisdiction, to order protective or restorative measures to prevent imminent harm or to put an end to a manifestly unlawful disturbance.
Defending a company accused of disparagement
A company may find itself accused after criticising a competitor’s products, alerting partners, challenging a commercial practice or informing its distributors that a dispute exists.
Our lawyers then check whether the statements:
- actually target an identifiable offering or business;
- rest on sufficiently serious material;
- concern a matter of general interest;
- were expressed in measured terms;
- were circulated to a relevant audience;
- genuinely caused the loss alleged.
The French Supreme Court accepts that information liable to discredit a product may be justified where it concerns a matter of general interest, rests on a sufficient factual basis and remains measured in its expression. Those conditions are assessed on the facts of each case.
Securing the company’s own communications
We also act upstream, reviewing communications liable to call another company into question:
- comparative advertising;
- a product study or ranking;
- a statement about a dispute;
- a warning sent to resellers;
- a reply to an online review;
- a public statement by a director;
- a warning about possible infringement.
This review checks how solid the facts are, the vocabulary used, who the legitimate recipients are and the risk created by an overly assertive presentation.
Typical disparagement situations
A competitor contacts your customers or your distributors
Your company learns that a competitor is emailing its trading partners to claim that your products are dangerous, non-compliant, infringing or of poor quality.
Even when sent to only a handful of distributors, such messages can have immediate consequences: a listing suspended, orders cancelled, a product launch refused or requests for explanations.
Our lawyers analyse the messages, identify their recipients, organise the preservation of evidence and assess the available options. They also examine the documents capable of establishing the effect of the campaign on commercial relationships.
A company is targeted by a fake review campaign
Several negative reviews are posted within a few days, although none of the accounts concerned corresponds to an order. The texts use similar wording and claim that the product is dangerous or non-compliant. We examine the profiles, the dates, the content and the available commercial data, then organise the steps to be taken with the platform and, where possible, against the authors.
An infringement allegation is communicated to the market
A company receives a cease-and-desist letter concerning one of its products. Before any court has ruled, the claimant writes to several resellers to assert that the product is infringing and to demand that it be withdrawn from sale. We analyse the rights relied on, the content of the messages, the recipients and the commercial consequences, in order to combine the intellectual property defence with a possible disparagement claim.
Telling customers about infringement proceedings on which no decision has yet been given may amount to wrongful disparagement (Cass. com., 9 January 2019, no. 17-18.350).
In the absence of a decision finding copyright infringement, telling third parties about a possible infringement amounts to disparagement of the products concerned (Cass. com., 15 October 2025, no. 24-11.150).
A company is challenged over a comparative study
A company publishes a study concluding that certain competing solutions are less secure or less effective. It receives a cease-and-desist letter demanding the immediate withdrawal of the document. We analyse the protocol, the sources, the title, the methodological caveats and the way the conclusions were presented, in order to assess whether the communication amounts to permissible professional criticism or goes beyond the limits of freedom of expression.
Awards and rankings
Bouchara & Avocats is regularly recognised for its expertise in intellectual property, digital platform law, data and advertising law.
Chambers France 2026 — Intellectual Property: Trade Mark & Copyright
Vanessa Bouchara — Band 2, thirteen years in the rankings.
Legal 500 EMEA 2026 — France — Intellectual Property: Copyright
Legal 500 EMEA 2026 — France — Intellectual Property: Trade Marks and Designs
Bouchara & Avocats — Tier 2.
Décideurs | Leaders League 2026 — Data law and cybersecurity
Bouchara & Avocats — « Strong reputation ».
Décideurs | Leaders League 2026 — Digital platforms and applications law
Bouchara & Avocats — « Strong reputation ».
Décideurs | Leaders League 2025 — Advertising and marketing law
Bouchara & Avocats — « Renowned practice ».
IP STARS — Managing IP 2026
Bouchara & Avocats — Copyright & Related Rights, Other Notable Firms.
What is commercial disparagement?
Disparagement consists in circulating information liable to discredit the products, services or business activities of another person. It has traditionally been treated as a form of unfair competition. It is actionable under article 1240 of the French Civil Code, which requires compensation for loss caused by a fault.
An identifiable company or offering
The company, brand or product targeted does not have to be expressly named. It is enough that the recipients can identify it from the context, the visuals, the characteristics of the offering or the circumstances of the communication. Conversely, general criticism aimed at an entire sector will not necessarily be enough to establish disparagement.
An assessment based on context
To bring a claim, the company must establish a fault, a loss and a link between the two. Direct competition is not always required: information discrediting an offering may be wrongful even where its author is not a competitor.
Finally, the characterisation depends on how the message is presented and circulated. An apparently neutral statement can become disparaging when it is addressed to customers in the course of a tender or accompanied by a competing offer. Conversely, harsh criticism may remain lawful where it rests on a sufficient factual basis, concerns a matter of general interest and remains measured.
Which court hears a commercial disparagement claim?
Depending on the status of the parties and the nature of the dispute, proceedings may fall to the commercial court or to the judicial court. Where the dispute is between commercial companies, the commercial court will in principle have jurisdiction over acts of unfair competition.
In interim relief proceedings, the judge may in particular order the measures needed to prevent imminent harm or to put an end to a manifestly unlawful disturbance (French Commercial Code, art. L. 721-3; French Code of Civil Procedure, art. 873).
Disparagement, defamation and insult: a decisive characterisation
The dividing line between these characterisations is decisive. It does not simply depend on how negative or offensive the statements are, but on their legal object.
Disparagement targets the offering or the business activity
Disparagement relates principally to a company’s products, services, work, methods or business activities.
Examples:
- « this software is not secure »;
- « these products are infringing »;
- « this solution does not comply with the applicable standards »;
- « this agency’s work is consistently substandard ».
These examples can only be characterised, however, after analysing their context, their factual basis and their recipients.
Defamation harms honour or reputation
Article 29 of the Act of 29 July 1881 defines defamation as the allegation or imputation of a fact that harms the honour or reputation of an identifiable person or body.
The provision specifies that an allegation may be punishable even where it is put in tentative terms or where the person is not expressly named, provided that they can be identified.
Examples liable to amount to defamation:
- accusing a director of fraud;
- imputing the commission of an offence to a company;
- claiming that a professional falsifies their results;
- attributing specific dishonest conduct to a person.
A legal entity can be the target of defamatory statements. It is therefore not enough to draw a mechanical distinction between individuals and the company: one has to ask whether the statements bear on the honour and reputation of the legal entity or whether they principally discredit its products and services.
Insult does not impute any specific fact
Under the same article 29, insult means an outrageous expression, a term of contempt or invective containing the imputation of no specific fact.
The distinction between insult and defamation therefore turns on whether the fact alleged is precise enough to be the subject of a debate on its proof.
Why does this distinction matter so much?
The characterisation of the statements determines the applicable procedure and the time limits for acting. Confusing disparagement with defamation can therefore defeat the claim.
Claims falling under the Act of 29 July 1881 are in principle time-barred after three months from the events or from the last interrupting step provided for by the Act, subject to special time limits for certain offences.
By contrast, a civil disparagement claim falls in principle under fault-based liability and is time-barred after five years from the day the company knew or ought to have known the facts allowing it to act (French Civil Code, arts. 1240 and 2224).
In practice, you should not rely on the five-year period applicable to disparagement alone. A recharacterisation as defamation can bring the matter within the far shorter period laid down by the Act of 29 July 1881.
How do you determine the right strategy?
The strategy does not depend solely on how negative the content is. It rests on several factors:
What the statements target
It must be determined whether the assertions target a product, a service, the company’s commercial policy or the honour of an identifiable person.
The audience actually reached
A message sent to a few strategic distributors can cause more damage than a public post that few people read. The number of recipients is therefore not enough to gauge how serious the matter is.
How solid the factual basis is
A study, a technical report or a court decision must be presented faithfully. Accurate information can nonetheless become wrongful where it is taken out of context, generalised or used to discredit an offering.
The commercial consequences
Cancelled orders, refusals to list a product, requests for explanations and broken-off negotiations must be documented. They make it possible to establish the loss and its link with the communication at issue.
The risk of amplification
A public statement may be needed to reassure the market, but it can also increase the visibility of the accusation. The priority objective (takedown, correction, non-repetition or compensation) must be defined before acting.
What measures can be sought?
Depending on the case, the relief sought may cover:
- ceasing and removing the statements;
- a prohibition on repeating them;
- a correction;
- an order backed by a daily penalty;
- disclosure of information;
- compensation for economic loss and for damage to commercial reputation.
Proof of loss must be separate from proof of the statements. Cancelled orders, de-listing, customer emails, a confined drop in sales or crisis-management costs can all help establish the consequences of the campaign.
No measure is automatic. The judge assesses in particular the seriousness of the statements, their audience, their duration, the strength of the material produced and the link between the alleged fault and the loss.
Are you the victim, or the accused, in a disparagement matter?
A disparagement campaign can quickly affect your relationships with customers, distributors or partners. Conversely, an insufficiently prepared communication about a competitor or a dispute can expose your company to liability.
For a review of your situation, our team is at your disposal.
Bouchara & Avocats
17 rue du Colisée
75008 Paris, France
Tel. +33 (0)1 42 25 42 30
info@cabinetbouchara.com
Intellectual Property Lawyers Team
FAQ
Does commercial disparagement require direct competition between the companies?
No. Direct competition is not always required to establish disparagement. The French Supreme Court confirmed this in a judgment of 9 January 2019: circulating information that discredits a product can be wrongful even where the parties are not competitors.
The economic relationship nonetheless remains a useful factor in assessing the purpose of the communication, the audience targeted and its consequences on the market.
Do you have to prove an intention to harm to bring a commercial disparagement claim?
Not necessarily. The analysis focuses above all on objective factors: the content of the statements, their medium, their recipients, their repetition, their factual basis and their foreseeable consequences.
Malicious intent may strengthen the case, but its absence is not enough to rule out liability under article 1240 of the French Civil Code.
Can accurate information be disparaging?
Yes, depending on how it is presented. Accurate information can become wrongful if it is taken out of context, generalised or expressed disproportionately — for example where pending proceedings are presented as conclusive proof of infringement.
The judge looks in particular at whether the subject is a matter of general interest, whether the statements rest on a sufficient factual basis and whether they were expressed in measured terms.
Can fake online reviews amount to commercial disparagement?
Fictitious or coordinated reviews may amount to disparagement where they discredit a company’s products, services or business. Where the statements instead impute a specific fact harming the honour of the company or its director, defamation may be the appropriate characterisation; the wording used and its target therefore have to be analysed carefully.
Can comparative advertising amount to commercial disparagement?
Yes, if it goes beyond an objective comparison and discredits a competitor’s trade marks, products, services or business. The comparison must relate to material, relevant, verifiable and representative features of the goods or services concerned (French Consumer Code, art. L. 122-1 and L. 122-2).
How do you demonstrate the loss caused by disparagement?
The company has to connect the statements with concrete consequences: cancelled orders, a postponed launch, the loss of a listing, broken-off negotiations, a drop in sales or the cost of managing the crisis. Correspondence with customers and distributors is often just as important as financial data in establishing that link.
Does removing the statements bring the disparagement dispute to an end?
Removal may stop the content being accessible, but it does not necessarily undo the consequences already produced. A claim may still cover lost orders, distributors’ reactions or the damage to commercial reputation caused while the content was circulating, provided these can be established and linked to the statements (French Civil Code, art. 1240).
