This Master thesis is focused on topic of distribution channels and theirs practical application in distribution of Philips Oral Healthcare products on Czech market. The theoretical part is devoted to the physical structure of distribution channels, the parameters that define them, and the factors influencing their choice. Furthermore, the thesis focuses on the relationships that exist between channel members, a system for management and direction of the common value added. The thesis is further concerned about relationships developed in between two channel members and presents a system for management of such relationships in order to develop them and deliver additional value. Under this approach the thesis further deals with the process of key customers selection and their further integration. In the next section a more detailed presentation of Philips Company is given, followed by description of oral healthcare market competition and distribution of end customers by their habits. Furthermore the thesis describes a practical example of Philips dealing with key customer in oral healthcare category. In order to fulfill the set objectives of the this thesis deep analysis of Philips current distribution channels takes place, followed by described anticipated development and proposed important area to ensure such development.

Alors que le contentieux des produits de santé n'a jamais été aussi fourni, l'application du régime spécial de responsabilité du fait des produits défectueux issu de la directive européenne du 25 juillet 1985, entraîne l'émergence d'un certain nombre d'incertitudes qui affectent directement le sort des demandes en réparation. Les incertitudes matérielles ont, pour la plupart reçu un traitement efficace par l'action conjuguée de la jurisprudence et du législateur. Si les outils juridiques traditionnels, tels que les présomptions ou la causalité alternative, ont permis de résoudre une partie non négligeable de ces incertitudes, les juges se sont également attachés à développer des outils nouveaux comme la balance bénéfice/risque ou encore la répartition de l'obligation à la dette selon les parts de marché. Cependant, si le développement de ces outils juridiques, plus adaptés aux spécificités des produits de santé, a permis d'apporter une solution efficace aux incertitudes matérielles, le traitement de l'incertitude scientifique, fondé sur les présomptions du fait de l'homme, n'apporte, toujours pas, de solutions satisfaisantes. L'étude du traitement des incertitudes dans le contentieux des produits de santé défectueux permet d'apprécier les acquis mais également les limites atteintes par l'utilisation de certains outils mis à la disposition des juges et qui se révèlent parfois inadaptés. L'intervention du législateur et la prise en compte des spécificités des produits de santé, permettraient de développer un système d'indemnisation adapté qui interviendrait de façon subsidiaire en cas d'échec de la voie contentieuse. / At a time when healthcare-product litigation is attaining record heights, the implementation into French law of the special liability regime for defective products, which derives from the European Council Directive of 25 July 1985, has led to the emergence of several grey areas of uncertainty which have a direct impact on the outcome of claims for compensation. Areas of material uncertainty have, for the most part, been effectively dealt with through the combined application of case law and the intervention of the legislator. While classic legal tools such as presumption and alternative causality provide a means to resolve a non-negligible part of these uncertainties, judges have also endeavoured to develop new tools, such as risk/utility test and market-share liability. Still, although the development of these legal tools - better suited as they are to the specific features of healthcare products - provide an effective solution to resolving areas of material uncertainty, the treatment of scientific uncertainty, which is based on presumptions of fact, does not always provide satisfactory solutions. The study of the legal treatment of uncertainty in healthcare-product litigation provides a means to assess the benefits but also the limitations of certain tools that are now available to judges but which at times prove inadequate. Intervention on the part of the legislator, while at the same time taking into account the specific features of healthcare products, could lead to the development of a suitable compensation system that could afford relief when litigation fails.