Indemnización por clientela en contratos vinculados al de agencia

agency contract


El contrato de agencia se puede combinar con otros como los de distribución o servicios post venta: ¿Generan dichos contratos vinculados derecho a la indemnización por clientela?

Consult your case now

La Audiencia Provincial de Palma de Mallorca ha reconocido el derecho de un agente comercial a que la indemnización por clientela se calcule también sobre aquellos servicios de promoción realizados al amparo de acuerdos anexos a un agency contract, aunque fueran de naturaleza más cercana al distribution agreement.

El fallo ha tenido lugar en la sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial de Palma de Mallorca nº 364/2016, rendered in date 07/12/2016.

Viaphone SMEs SL and Vodafone Spain SAU held several contracts: dos de agencia exclusiva, for which the first was committed to grasp for the second clients were individuals and companies, otro de distribution minorista por el que el primero se comprometía a distribuir en exclusiva productos prepago titularidad de la segunda, y otro de servicios postventa, por el que el primero se comprometía a prestar los servicios de atención al cliente ante las averías o problemas que pudieran surgir.

Each of those contracts had a specific remuneration system: in agency compensation it consisted of a commission earned by the agent; in distribution, in the trade margin; and the after-sales service, at the rate established in the contract for the service. Additionally, also foresaw certain "programs", which they involved additional remuneration for the agent according to the goals reached.

Dichos contratos fueron resueltos por Vodafone España SAU.

Vipahone Pymes SL fue declarada en concurso y D. Mauricio, He succeeded to the position of a creditor of the latter with respect to that.

Thus, D. Mauricio, in his capacity as creditor subrogated, lawsuit filed claim amount against Vodafone Spain SAU, to be ordered to pay the 1.219.205,04 € en concepto de compensation for clientele, plus interest. However, dicha demanda fue estimada sólo parcialmente por el Juzgado de Primera Instancia nº 14 Palma de Mallorca: In its judgment of 02/05/2016 He condemned Vodafone Spain SAU to pay Viaphone SMEs SL 277.590,57 € in compensation for clients. This decision is mainly rested on the consideration that, of all contracts, only the first two were agency, so that SMEs Viaphone SL was not for compensation for customers by the other two.

Against that judgment, D. Mauricio interpuso recurso de apelación ante la Audiencia Provincial de Palma de Mallorca fundándolo en que, a su juicio, compensation for customers should be calculated including not only major agency contracts, but also contracts distribution and after-sales service.

The Provincial Court, before entering into the merits, recalls the general characteristics of the agency contract, and thus it indicates that the agency agreement can be defined as one for which a natural or legal person is obligated to another continuously or stable and remuneration, exclusively to promote trade acts or operations employed, or to promoting and concluding for and on behalf of others, as an independent intermediary, without assuming the risk of such operations unless otherwise agreed. It is characterized primarily, therefore, to refer to a stable collaboration and paid, that supports the non-competition agreement and requiring forewarning prior to the termination of contract.

Also, also recalls that within the agency contract, compensation for clientele is but a compensation which is entitled the agent has brought new customers to your main, or that it has increased the number of operations with existing customers, to the extent that their activity will continue to produce substantial benefits for said main, because of the loss of commissions that marks the end of the contract, the existence of a non-competition pact, or any other circumstance that determines that, not meet such compensation, the principal employer is unjustifiably enriching.

From there, la Audiencia Provincial indica que, for the emergence of the right agent to receive such compensation, it's necessary that:

1) El agente haya aportado nuevos clientes a su principal o incrementado sensiblemente el número de operaciones durante la vigencia del contrato de agencia;

2) Dicho incremento continúe produciendo ventajas sustanciales al empresario tras la extinción del contrato de agencia;

3) Ha de resultar procedente para compensar la pérdida de comisiones, the existence of agreements limiting competition, or other circumstances.

Once the front ends have clarified, It does not fit the hearing but whether the legal regime of compensation for customers can apply to a contract that the parties have not referred to as "agency", but keep some connection with the same. In that sense, appointment of the judgment of the Provincial Court of Valladolid 01/02/2016, and another of the very Court of Palma de Mallorca 30/06/2016, the court concludes 1) the contract sales services refers to a complementary activity of the agency contract; 2) that those "programs" represent remuneration for commercial purposes, which they are included in the concept of pay in Article 11.2 de la Ley del Contrato de Agencia; and 3) it is possible to apply the distribution agreement figure of compensation for customers.

To support the third of those conclusions, namely, that the distribution agreement it is possible to apply the figure of compensation for customers, the Provincial Court cites the judgment of the Supreme Court 16/03/2016, expressly states that "specifically, the judgment of the Plenum No.. 1392/2007 He recognized the appropriateness of compensation for customers, legislatively provided for agency contracts, concerning the concession contracts or distribution, with base, above all, in Art. 1258 CC”, for the following reasons:

– Because the distribution agreement contract there is also an asset acquired by the grantor to extinguish, which is an enrichment that would without justification if the creative effort of the asset is not would compensate (namely, customer created or consolidated, beyond the duration of the contract, by the dealer on behalf of the grantor).

– For this circumstance keeps great similarity and identity of reason with the agency agreement, making it possible to apply by analogy Article 28 de la Ley del Contrato de Agencia, which provides for compensation for customers. This is because, also, it is a rule of mandatory nature, that no longer applies even if the parties have so sought.

– Because Article 1258 the Civil Code stipulates that the agreement by the parties must be integrated with the consequences, depending on the nature of the contract, they are in accordance with good faith, al uso y a la ley.

Therefore, the Provincial Court, understanding that the figure of compensation for clientele should apply to all contracts concluded, It concludes that the maximum amount to be received by Vipahone SMEs SL in compensation for clientele is 1.056.025,07 € without VAT, but that amount should be corrected by a factor of 35%, so that, finally partially it upheld the appeal and condemns Vodafone Spain SAU to pay Vipahone the number of SMEs SL 369.608.77 €.

Consult your case now

Leave a Reply


Set as default language
 Edit Translation

Subscribe to receive a book PDF

Just for signing up receive via email the link to download the book "How to change lawyers" en format digital.
Sign up here

Sígueme en Twitter

Subscribe me

* This field is required