A Bordeaux wine merchant has successfully sued Chateau Latour for dropping its allocation of en primeur wine - and plans to return to court to demand further compensation.
Bordeaux Magnum annually received 15 cases of both Chateau Latour and its second wine Les Forts de Latour until July 2004 when it was informed that it would not be receiving its usual shipment.
On April 5 this year, a Bordeaux tribunal awarded the merchant damages of €39,620 for 'a sudden interruption of its en primeur allocation'.
'After 20 years they said no more, but they did not give any credible reason,' owner Maxime Hamma told decanter.com. 'They said we didn't buy enough, and that they have less and less wine. But they are keeping back wine to push up the price.'
Other negociants agreed that some chateaux reduce their en primeur allocations as a commercial strategy to push up the price, to have more to sell as bottled wine, and to control volumes.
'This [speculation] is the phylloxera of the 21st century,' Hamma said.
The system of en primeur is further complicated by the fact that few chateaux have contracts with the merchants who receive their allocations – it is done through longstanding arrangements with negociants.
Hamma is in the process of appealing the award, and will return to court to ask for the full €118,000 amount he originally sued for. Christine Jais, the lawyer for Latour, who was not available for comment today, has said, 'We will defend our reasons in court.'
The director of another Medoc classified growth, who did not wish to be named, said, 'Surely it is the prerogative of the chateau owner to decide his commercial strategy, and which merchants he wants to work with. That is just the natural way of doing business – and today having partnerships with negociants you can trust is more important than ever.'
Have your say... To post your comment on this story, email us at news@decanter.com, making sure the relevant headline is in the subject field
Owners have for too long seen their wines that they have released at let's say, fairly reasonable rates, tripling and quadrupling prices once sold and fat margins have been made by merchants and importers. So, who can blame them for keeping back some wine? Why should it be left to the merchants alone to sell bottled wine at sky rocking prices?
And the fact that there are no written contracts on allocations between owner and merchants is a double-edged sword: so owners found (and regularly find) themselves "dropped" by negociants when their wine, for any more or less clearly defined reasons, was/is not demanded by the market anymore. Why does anyone complain about this fact? Which château sued a merchant for this reason? Bordeaux, name and address withheld
Register on decanter.com absolutely free for news alerts delivered direct to your email inbox, and our fortnightly newsletter with advance notice of what’s coming up in Decanter magazine, offers, competitions and more.
PLUS registration is a one-stop shop for the Decanter magazine Archive and Decanter Fine Wine Tracker.
Owners have for too long seen their wines that they have released at let's say, fairly reasonable rates, tripling and quadrupling prices once sold and fat margins have been made by merchants and importers. So, who can blame them for keeping back some wine? Why should it be left to the merchants alone to sell bottled wine at sky rocking prices?
