Decision ID: 001705
In June 2005 the Executive Committee noted that in May 2005 the Court of Appeal in Rennes had rendered a judgement in respect of a claim by an oyster grower in Morbihan. It was recalled that the 1992 Fund had compensated the claimant for losses due to a reduction in sales up to 30 September 2000 but had rejected the claim for further losses for the period 1 October to 31 December 2000 on the grounds that there was no reduction in sales in the shellfish sector after 30 September 2000 in the area in which the claimant was located. It was recalled that the Commercial Court in Lorient had stated that it was not bound by the Fund’s admissibility criteria and had appointed an expert to assess whether the claimant had suffered a loss during that period and, if so, whether there was a direct link between the loss and the incident. The Committee recalled that it had decided that, in view of the importance of the issue for the proper functioning of the compensation regime based on 1992 Conventions, the Fund should pursue an appeal against the judgement. It was noted that the Court of Appeal, having stated that the Fund’s criteria were not binding on national courts but could serve as a reference for the national judge, confirmed the decision of the Commercial Court that the claim was admissible in principle and the appointment of an expert. It was noted, however, that the Court of Appeal, in referring the case back to the Commercial Court in Lorient, had amended the terms of reference of the expert in order to establish whether the loss for the period 1 October-31 December 2000 had resulted from an enduring loss of confidence by consumers in respect of seafood, in particular oysters, due to the contamination caused by the incident or to other causes.