Application of the new law to unilateral promises made before the reform of February 16, 2016

Cass, Com, March 15, 2023, n°21-20.399

In its decision of March 15, 2023, the Court of Cassation applies to a unilateral promise of sale contracted before 2016 the law resulting from the entry into force of the reform of February 10, 2016, affirming then that the revocation of the promise before the expiry of the time left to the beneficiary to opt does not prevent the formation of the promised contract.

 

1. The legal framework

The reform of February 10, 2016, which came into force on October 1st, 2016, modifies the penalty for withdrawing the unilateral promise during the time allotted to the beneficiary to exercise the option.

Before the reform, the withdrawal of the promisor during this period was presumed to have prevented any meeting of the minds, so that the beneficiary could not seek the forced completion of the sale, and could only claim damages.

Following the reform, Article 1124 provides that withdrawal during this period does not prevent the formation of the promised contract.

 

2. The facts

In this case, two companies entered into a memorandum of understanding on June 21, 2012 under the terms of which one of them granted the other a unilateral promise to transfer shares. The beneficiary company then had six months from a general meeting to exercise the option.

On March 8, 2016, the promisor notified the retraction of its unilateral promise, and on the following June 28, the beneficiary company notified its intention to exercise the option.

The promisor is then summoned to enforce the promise and to pay damages for the late completion of the sale.

The Court of Appeal rejected his claims on the grounds that the contract – and therefore the promise – was concluded before the entry into force of the Ordinance of February 10, 2016, and that it is therefore the old law, whereby the exercise of the option by the beneficiary after the retraction of the promisor cannot result in the forced realization of the sale, that is intended to apply.

 

3. The opinion of the Court of Cassation

The Court of Cassation overturned the appeal decision by applying the law resulting from the reform, according to which the promisor is definitively obliged to sell, even before the opening of the option period offered to the beneficiary, making any retraction ineffective.

The Court thus confirms the decision of the Third Civil Chamber of June 23, 2021, which also applies the new law to a contract concluded before the reform of February 10, 2016.

You may also be interested in this news
The News by NMCG – May 2023
News By NMCG
The News by NMCG - May 2023
The intuitu personae clause tested by a change of control or management of one of the contracting companies
Article
The intuitu personae clause tested by a change of control or management of one of the contracting companies
Legislative and case law developments for “Dark stores” and “Dark kitchens
Article
Legislative and case law developments for "Dark stores" and "Dark kitchens
Unfair competition: borrowing elements of a communication is protectable […]
Article
Unfair competition: borrowing elements of a communication is protectable [...]
Interpretation of approval clauses prior to the reform of June 24, 2004 […].
Article
Interpretation of approval clauses prior to the reform of June 24, 2004 [...].
Bank’s duty to warn […].
Article
Bank's duty to warn [...].
Presumption of resignation in the event of voluntary abandonment of post by employee comes into force on April 19, 2023
Article
Presumption of resignation in the event of voluntary abandonment of post by employee comes into force on April 19, 2023
New ruling by the French Supreme Court on moral harassment
Article
New ruling by the French Supreme Court on moral harassment
Employers can use anonymous testimony to prove employee misconduct
Article
Employers can use anonymous testimony to prove employee misconduct
Clarifications from the Cour de cassation on the renunciation of the DS mandate
Article
Clarifications from the Cour de cassation on the renunciation of the DS mandate
Lawyer profile : Claire Peroux
Inside NMCG
Lawyer profile : Claire Peroux
Sub-leasing of commercial premises
Article
Sub-leasing of commercial premises
Non-compliance with the GDPR is a new ground for cancellation of a contract
Article
Non-compliance with the GDPR is a new ground for cancellation of a contract
The acquisition of shares by the company following the refusal of approval of a transfer to a third party
Article
The acquisition of shares by the company following the refusal of approval of a transfer to a third party
An anxiety-depressive disorder can suspend the statute of limitations on an action to contest a dismissal
Article
An anxiety-depressive disorder can suspend the statute of limitations on an action to contest a dismissal
Use of delegation hours and the role of the interim relief judge
Article
Use of delegation hours and the role of the interim relief judge
The Distinctions