Order

General Register No.: 646/98 ORDER 3 July 1998 SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS (*référé*) ADVERSARIAL LEGAL AID Admission of the in favour of .Eg: We, Jean MAZARS, President of Chamber A of the Paris Court of Appeal, acting by delegation of the First President of this Court, assisted by Myriam GALLIT. Registrar... Having regard to the summons in summary proceedings issued at the request of: 1) . The company SEBOL, SA Jini io whose registered office is at CENTRE COMMIRCIAL CARREFOUR, chomin de Sait Clavile at ANTIBES (06600), represented by the chairman of the board of directors, Mr COLLORAF), domiciled in this capacity at the said registered office; 2) • The company D & O, SARL Joni le whose registered office is at Rond-Point Weissciles, rouís de Grasse at ANTIBES (0060D), represented by its manager, Mr COLLORAFI, domiciled in this capacity at the said registered office; 3) - The company LESPINS. SARL whose registered office is at 32 avenue de Cannes at JUAN-LES- PINS (06160), represented by its manager, Mr COLLORAFI, domiciled in this capacity at the said registered office; 4) - Mr Bernard COLLOBAEL, acting in his personal name and in his capacity as signatory of the lease-management agreements (*location-gérance*), residing at 21 b chemin de l'Estelle (OXS0) LE CANNET-ROCHEVILLE; APPLICANTS, Having Me PAMART as Avoué, and Me CLEMENT as Avocat, page I 86/87/29 -_17:24 .Ps: 4 SUIVANCOURT CEDE DALLES PUIS BI REG A 17844, c, i rue Gustave Biffel RESPONDENT, Having the SCP FISSELIER CHILOUX BOULAY as Avoué, and Me LELOUP, of the POITIERS bar, as Avocat, And after having heard the counsel of the parties: The Commercial Court of Paris, by judgment of 18 May 1998, in particular recorded the termination by operation of law of the lease-management agreements (*location-gérance*) concluded between the company MAC DONALD'S FRANCE (MAC DONALD'S), on the one hand, and the companies SELOL, B ET O, LES PINS and Mr Bernard COLLORAFI, on the other, ordered the eviction of those concerned on pain of a daily penalty, and ordered jointly and severally to pay to the company MAC DONALD'S: • the company SEBOL and Mr COLIORAFI, the sums of 1,867,247.84 F with statutory interest and of 16,000 F per day by way of occupation indemnities from 2 January 1998, - the company B ET O and Mr COLLORAFI, that of 1,533,548.87 F with statutory interest and of 24,000 F per day from the same date and in the same way - the company LES PINS and Mr COLLORAFI, that of 505,474.42 F with statutory interest and of 15,000 F per day under the same head and from the same date, ordered the capitalisation of interest and ordered provisional enforcement. The companies SEBOL, B ET O and LES PINS, as well as Mr COLLORAFI, lodged an appeal against this decision and summoned the company MAC DONALD'S in summary proceedings in order to obtain a stay of provisional enforcement and to be authorised to deposit part of the sums fixed, and they seek the award of the sum of 10,000 F under article 700 of the new Code of Civil Procedure. They criticise the solution adopted by the Tribunal, pointing out that the sums provided for by it are considerable and would deprive Mr COLLORAFI of the fruit of his work and his investments and would oblige him to file for the insolvency of his companies. They propose, in the alternative, to deposit the sums that they consider they owe. page 2 0or01050u-.11:24 By later submissions filed following the eviction of the companies, they state that they can no longer deposit the sums offered, seek the reinstatement of the three companies in the premises and the fixing of the case on a priority basis before the Court. They state that they fear forced enforcement of the monetary awards, the amount of which they dispute, and consider that their appeal would thus lose all interest. The company MAC DONALD'S concludes that the request for return of the premises is inadmissible, that the request for a stay of provisional enforcement for the other heads of award should be rejected and that the sum of 30,000 F be awarded under article 700 of the new Code of Civil Procedure. It maintains that the Tribunal's decision is well founded, that the enforcement judge refused the period of grace sought, that the applicants are using delaying procedures, that the First President cannot go back on the heads of the judgment that have been enforced, that the applicants can obtain a substantial sum (4,285,270 F excl. tax) for the buy-back of the equipment of the evicted companies, and that the impossibility of paying the sums claimed is not a ground for staying provisional enforcement, stressing that the companies no longer have any activity owing to the loss of their operating premises. The applicants in summary proceedings reply by disputing the analysis of the facts made by the company MAC DONALD'S, invoke the brutality and disloyalty of this company, stress that the latter has already paid itself its claim and by recovering the equipment of the evicted companies. THAT BEING SET OUT, Whereas under the terms of article 524 of the new Code of Civil Procedure, we may, in the event of appeal, stay the provisional enforcement ordered by the first judges if it risks entailing manifestly excessive consequences; Whereas the criticisms made of the judgment are ineffective in the present proceedings; Whereas the eviction of the companies SEBOL, B ET O and LES PINS has been carried out; that no text gives us jurisdiction, in the context of the present proceedings, to order their reinstatement in the premises; that the request to that effect is therefore inadmissible; Whereas, as regards the monetary awards, it should be stressed that the company MAC DONALD'S finds itself de facto, by reason of the eviction measure which it had carried out, in possession of equipment belonging to these companies for an amount which it itself estimates at 4,285,230 F; page 3 Whereas the amount of the awards and the loss of operating income of the companies following the eviction from their business premises are of a nature to entail the filing for insolvency; that this consequence is manifestly excessive, all the more so as it would have the effect of depriving the appeal against the judgment of all practical significance; that the present proceedings do not appear dilatory; that provisional enforcement of the payment of the sums fixed will therefore be Whereas the forced cessation of the activity of the applicant companies is an element which shows that their rights are in jeopardy; that it is appropriate to apply the provisions of article 917 (and not 948) of the new Code of Civil Procedure under the conditions provided for below; Whereas each party fails partially in its claims; that it appears equitable to leave them to bear their own costs not recoverable; Whereas the costs of the present summary proceedings will follow the fate of those of the main proceedings; FOR THESE REASONS DECLARE inadmissible the request for reinstatement in the premises of the companies SEBOL, B ET O and LES PINS; STAY the provisional enforcement of the provisions relating to the monetary awards contained in the judgment delivered on 18 May 1998 by the Commercial Court of Paris; FIX Wednesday 30 September 1998 at 2 p.m. as the date on which the case between the present parties will be called on a priority basis before the 16th chamber section A of this Court: DISMISS the parties from their other claims; SAY that the costs of the present proceedings will follow the fate of those of the main proceedings; ORDER delivered on the THIRD OF JULY NINETEEN HUNDRED NINETY-EIGHT by Mr President MAZARS, who signed the minutes together with Mrs GALLUT, Registrar. page # TOTAL PAGE(S) OF