► Full Reference:  B. Sillaman, "Taking the Compliance U.S. Procedural Experience globally", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, coll. "Compliance & Regulation", to be published. 

____

📘read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): The French legal system is evolving, organizing interaction between lawyers with regulators and prosecutors, specially in investigations about corruption or corporate misconduct, adopting U.S. negotiated resolutions such as the Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public, which encourages "collaboration" between them. 

The author describes the evolution of the U.S. DOJ doctrine and askes French to be inspired by the U.S. procedural experience, U.S. where this mechanism came from. Indeed, the DOJ released memoranda about what the "collaboration" means. At the end (2006 Memorandum), the DOJ has considered that the legal privilege must remain intact when the information is not only factual in order to maintain trust between prosecutors, regulators and lawyers.

French authorities do not follow this way. The author regrets it and thinks they should adopt the same reasoning as the American authority on the secret professionnel of the avocat, especially when he intervenes in the company internal investigation.

____

🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses

________

► Référence complète : P.-Y. Gautier, « Contre le droit illimité à la preuve devant les autorités administratives indépendantes », Mélanges en l'honneur du Professeur Claude Lucas de Leyssac, LexisNexis, 2018, p.181-193.

____

📘 Lire une présentation générale de l'ouvrage dans lequel l'article est publié

The procedural guarantees enjoyed by a person whose situation may be affected by a forthcoming judgment are mainly the right of action, the rights of defense and the benefit of the adversarial principle.

The rights of the defense have constitutional value and constitute human rights, benefiting everyone, including legal persons. The mission of positive Law is to give effect to them in good time, that is to say from the moment of the investigation or custody, which is manifested for example by the right to the assistance of a lawyer or the right to remain silent or the right to lie. Thus the rights of the defense are not intended to help the manifestation of the truth, do not help the judge or the effectiveness of repression - which is what the principle of adversarial law does - they are pure rights, subjective for the benefit of people, including even especially people who may be perfectly guilty, and seriously guilty.

The rights of the defense are therefore an anthology of prerogatives which are offered to the person implicated or likely to be or likely to be affected. It does not matter if it possibly affects the efficiency. These are human rights. This is why their most natural holder is the person prosecuted in criminal proceedings or facing a system of repression. This is why the triggering of the power of a tribunal or a judge offers them in a consubstantial way to the one who is by this sole fact - and legitimately - threatened by this legitimate violence (one of the definitions of the State ).

The rights of the defense therefore begin even before the trial because the "useful time" begins from the investigation phase, from the searches, even from the controls, and continues on the occasion of appeals against the decision adversely affecting the decision. The legal action being a means of being a party, that is to say of making arguments in its favor, and therefore of defending its case, shows that the plaintiff in the proceedings also holds legal defense rights since he is not only plaintiff in the proceedings but he also plaintiff and defendant to the allegations which are exchanged during the procedure: he alleged to the allegation of his opponent is not correct.

They take many forms and do not need to be expressly provided for in texts, since they are principled and constitutionally benefit from a broad interpretation (ad favorem interpretation). This is the right to be a party (for example the right of intervention, the right of action - which some distinguish from the rights of the defense - the right to be questioned, such as the right to be brought into question (or examination), right to be assisted by a lawyer, right to remain silent, right not to incriminate oneself, right of access to the file, right to intervene in the debate (the rights of the defense thus crossing the adversarial principle), right to appeal, etc.

It is essential to qualify an organ as a tribunal because this triggers for the benefit of the person concerned the procedural guarantees, including the rights of the defense, which on the basis of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights man was made about the Regulators yet formally organized in Independent Administrative Authorities (AAI). This contributed to the general movement of jurisdictionalization of Regulation.

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, Coordination et animation du cycle de conférences-débats Contentieux Systémique Émergent, organisé à l'initiative de la Cour d'appel de Paris, avec la Cour de cassation, la Cour d'appel de Versailles, l'École nationale de la magistrature (ENM) et l'École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris (EFB), sous la direction scientifique de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, 11h-12h30

____

► Le Cycle en quelques mots : Devoir de Vigilance, supervision des plateformes, information extrafinancière (CSRD), etc. : autant de nouveaux textes qui portent devant les juges des contentieux d’un type nouveau.

Malgré leur diversité, les cas portés devant les juges les plus divers présentent une unité : à travers le litige qui oppose les parties, c’est un système qui est en jeu, par exemple le système climatique, numérique, énergétique, financier, etc.

Les réglementations nouvelles ne sont que l’illustration de ce « contentieux systémique émergent » dont la formation a pour objet de montrer les nouveaux champs, les nouvelles techniques, les nouvelles normes, etc., en lien avec l’ampleur et la diversité des attentes des parties prenantes. Le cycle vise à favoriser les échanges croisés, afin d’alimenter la réflexion des magistrats en amont des litiges qui leurs seront soumis.

____

🔴Les inscriptions et renseignements se font à l’adresse : inscriptionscse@gmail.com

🔴Pour les avocats, les inscriptions se font à l’adresse suivante : https://evenium.events/cycle-de-conferences-contentieux-systemique-emergent/ 

⚠️Les conférences-débats se tiennent en présentiel à la Cour d’appel de Paris

____

► Présentation générale du cycle : En 2024, la Cour d’appel de Paris a créé une nouvelle chambre spécialisée : la chambre 5-12 Contentieux émergent – Devoir de vigilance et responsabilité écologique. Le contentieux de la vigilance est un exemple de ce qui émerge d’une façon plus générale : le contentieux systémique, souvent lié aux technologies. Celui-ci appelle une nouvelle façon de juger, d’organiser les procédures et les relations entre professionnels. Pour entrer dans ce Contentieux Systémique Émergent, une série de conférences-débats, valant formation continue, est organisée conjointement par la Cour d’appel de Paris, la Cour d’appel de Versailles, la Cour de cassation, l’École nationale de la magistrature (ENM) et l’École de Formation du Barreau (EFB), placée sous la responsabilité scientifique de la Professeure Marie-Anne Frison-Roche.

Dans ce contexte, un cycle de conférences-débats faisant appel à des professionnels d’horizons très divers est proposé sur les thématiques suivantes :

• 🧮la notion même de « contentieux systémique émergent » et la place qu’y occupe le magistrat (29 mars 2024) : en lire le compte-rendu

• 🧮la vigilance, en tant qu’elle donne lieu à un contentieux systémique, notamment parce qu’elle prend forme juridique dans de nombreux contrats, par exemple dans les relations de travail (26 avril 2024)

• 🧮la prise en considération dans le contentieux systémique émergent des techniques de fiabilité des informations, notamment sur les contenus disponibles sur les plateformes (27 mai 2024)

• 🧮la façon dont l’intelligence artificielle engendre un contentieux systémique et l’influence des nouveaux textes spécifiques pris (24 juin 2024)

• 🧮l’articulation entre les normes de droit dur et de droit souple au service de la résolution du contentieux systémique, notamment à propos des rapports de durabilité (9 septembre 2024)

• 🧮les techniques probatoires nouvelles requises par le contentieux systémique émergent, pour rendre compte des besoins systémiques, par exemple des systèmes climatiques et numériques, et la façon dont les entreprises y répondent (14 octobre 2024)

• 🧮les techniques procédurales pour prendre en considération l’intérêt des divers systèmes dans le contentieux systémique (18 novembre 2024)

• 🧮retour d’expérience institutionnelle et jurisprudentielle des juridictions dans le contentieux systémique émergent (16 décembre 2024)

____

🧮consulter ci-dessous le programme complet du cycle de conférences-débats⤵️

________

Référence complète : Lebovici, S., C'est pas juste, in Baranès, W. et Frison-Roche, M.-A., La justice. L'obligation impossible, coll. " Nos valeurs", Éditions Autrement, 1994, p. 16-27.

Consulter la présentation générale de l'ouvrage.

Consulter une analyse dans laquelle cet article est cité.

« Les étudiants de Sciences po peuvent lire l’article via le Drive de Sciences po en allant dans le dossier « MAFR – Régulation ».

► Référence complète : L’expérience des juridictions dans le Contentieux Systémique Émergent, in cycle de conférences-débats "Contentieux Systémique Émergent", organisé à l'initiative de la Cour d'appel de Paris, avec la Cour de cassation, la Cour d'appel de Versailles, l'École nationale de la magistrature (ENM) et l'École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris (EFB), sous la responsabilité scientifique de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, 16 décembre 2024, 11h-12h30, Cour d'appel de Paris, Première Chambre

____

► Présentation de la conférence : 

____

🧮Programme de cette manifestation : 

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, coordination of the conference Les pratiques juridictionnelles au service d'un espace juridique pour le futur (Jurisdictional practices at the service of a legal area for the future), in Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation), Cycle of conferences "Penser les pratiques juridictionnelles au service d’un espace de justice", November 21, 2023, 16h-18h

____

► General presentation of the conference: 

____

🧮read the programme of the cycle of conférences in 2023 (in French)

________

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Conclusion", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), Dans l’espace de justice, les pratiques juridictionnelles au service du futur, in Cour de cassation, Cycle de conférences "Penser les pratiques juridictionnelles au service d’un espace de justice", 21 novembre 2023

____

🧮Consulter le programme complet de cette manifestation

____

► Présentation de la conférence : La conception tient compte du fait que l’évènement vient quasiment en dernier dans le cycle. Ont été précédemment traitées les « pratiques juridictionnelles » en ce qu’elles sont « au service d’un espace de justice » européen (février 2023), éclairé (mars 2023), attractif (juin 2023), interactif (septembre 2023), pacificateur (décembre 2023).

La problématique de la conférence par d’un constat : aujourd’hui l’on apporte à des juges des prétentions qui portent directement sur le futur. Certes, dans son office classique le juge aborde l’avenir des situations litigieuses, mais ce sont aujourd’hui l’avenir des systèmes dans leur entièreté qui, à travers une dispute ou une demande, leur est parfois soumis, et une solution demandée. La possible présence des générations futures en est un signe parmi d’autres.

L’espace de justice peut paraître inadaptée pour des procès si gigantesques, et par leur objet et par leur retentissement.

Sans doute faut-il distinguer selon les juges et certains juges peuvent paraître plus familiers que d’autres aux enjeux systémiques que le futur porte avec lui. Peut-être la prudence du juge doit-il le conduire à ne pas l’entraîner par exemple dans le maniement des sanctions à user de son pouvoir sur ce futur, en oubliant que le futur contient par nature une part d’inconnu, prudence fondamentale que le principe de la légalité des délits et des peines exprime.

Mais le futur n’est pas non plus une page blanche et le juge, sans inventer celui-ci, peut contrôler la cohérence de ceux qui écrivent la loi, s’il est juge constitutionnel, ceux qui écrivent les contrats et les engagements. Pour remplir son office, que les parties prenantes demandent, les juges doivent penser et traiter en dialogue ce nouvel objet systémique qui se présente aujourd’hui devant eux : le futur.

Pour l’appréhender, les juges puisent dans les pratiques juridictionnelles disponibles, en ajustent d’autres, les articulent entre elles, dans des méthodes renouvelées.

________

► Référence complète : Les techniques probatoires adéquates dans le Contentieux Systémique Émergent, in cycle de conférences-débats "Contentieux Systémique Émergent", organisé à l'initiative de la Cour d'appel de Paris, avec la Cour de cassation, la Cour d'appel de Versailles, l'École nationale de la magistrature (ENM) et l'École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris (EFB), sous la responsabilité scientifique de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, 14 octobre, 11h-12h30, Cour d'appel de Paris, salle Cassin

____

► Présentation de la conférence : 

____

🧮Programme de cette manifestation : 

► Référence complète : La portée des normes de droit dur, de droit souple et des normes techniques dans le contentieux systémique émergent, in cycle de conférences-débats "Contentieux Systémique Émergent", organisé à l'initiative de la Cour d'appel de Paris, avec la Cour de cassation, la Cour d'appel de Versailles, l'École nationale de la magistrature (ENM) et l'École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris (EFB), sous la responsabilité scientifique de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, 9 septembre 2024, 11h-12h30, Cour d'appel de Paris, salle Cassin

____

► Présentation de la conférence : 

____

🧮Programme de cette manifestation : 

► Référence complète : L’intelligence artificielle, nouveau champ de contentieux systémique, in cycle de conférences-débats "Contentieux Systémique Émergent", organisé à l'initiative de la Cour d'appel de Paris, avec la Cour de cassation, la Cour d'appel de Versailles, l'École nationale de la magistrature (ENM) et l'École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris (EFB), sous la responsabilité scientifique de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, 24 juin 2024, 11h-12h30, Cour d'appel de Paris, salle Cassin

____

► Présentation de la conférence : 

____

🧮Programme de cette manifestation : 

Quatrième conférence-débat

L’INTELLIGENCE ARTIFICIELLE, NOUVEAU CHAMP DE CONTENTIEUX SYSTÉMIQUE

Cour d’appel de Paris, salle Cassin

Présentation et modération par 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Professeure de Droit de la Régulation et de la Compliance, Directrice du Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC)

🕰️11h-11h20. 🎤Les premiers contentieux systémiques observables impliquant l’intelligence artificielle, par 🕴️Sonia Cissé, Avocate Associée, Linklaters Paris

🕰️11h20-11h40. 🎤L’influence des nouveaux textes et des textes à venir sur les contentieux systémiques émergents impliquant l’intelligence artificielle, par 🕴️Yannick Meneceur, magistrat en disponibilité, Conseil de l’Europe, Université de Strasbourg

🕰️11h40-12h30. Débat

____

🔴Les inscriptions et renseignements se font à l’adresse : inscriptionscse@gmail.com

🔴Pour les avocats, les inscriptions se font à l’adresse suivante : https://evenium.events/cycle-de-conferences-contentieux-systemique-emergent/ 

⚠️Les conférences-débat se tiennent en présentiel à la Cour d’appel de Paris.

________

► Full Reference: J.-B. Racine, "L’arbitre, juge, superviseur, accompagnateur ?" (The arbitrator, judge, supervisor, coach?), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2024, forthcoming.

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► English Summary of this article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : From the outset, the author sets out what is at stake in these terms:  "Quel rôle peut ou pourrait jouer l’arbitre dans les dispositifs de compliance ? Selon le rôle qu’il est amené à jouer, il peut ou pourrait venir en renfort de l’obligation de compliance. Poser cette question, c’est poser la question des pouvoirs de l’arbitre et de son office. C’est aussi, d’une certaine manière, renvoyer à la notion même d’arbitrage." (What role can or could the arbitrator play in compliance systems? Depending on the role he/she is called upon to play, he/she can or could reinforce the compliance obligation. Asking this question raises the question of the powers of the arbitrator and his/her office. In a way, it also goes back to the very notion of arbitration). 

In practice, arbitrators deal with compliance issues in their office as judges. This is illustrated by disputes involving allegations of corruption, where the arbitrators' ruling obviously cannot give effect to a corrupt practice unless they violate themselves international public order. But in this, the arbitrator is only applying a legal standard, the main issue being then the question of evidence, with compliance tools often serving as indicators of the corruption itself. Leaving behind the strict legal source and coming to the standards issued by the ICC about the fight against corruption, we really enter into the "compliance obligation", in the strict sense, when a contract appears.

International business practices standards are emerging, not only in the area of probity but also in the protection of human rights, for which arbitrators can now act as guarantors. Arbitrators can do this, in particular, through the emerging litigation relating to vigilance obligation, either directly when vigilance plans are at issue,, even if a legal rule gives a specific competence to a State court (as the French 2017 law does) or if we imagine that a plan itself includes a system for recourse to arbitration, which would imply a change in culture, or if we consider that soft law is in the process of emerging from the practices of international trade laying down a duty of vigilance that arbitrators could take up.

In the second part of his contribution, the author takes a second, bolder approach, namely that of an arbitrator who understands Compliance Law in that he/she would be more than a Judge, i.e. he/she would do more than settle a dispute by applying the law.

This would be conceivable given the tendency to consider that the arbitrator could modify contracts and if example is taken from the technique of arbitration practised for concentration disputes in merger law. To give arbitration the required regulatory dimension, this third party would have to be able to exercise a supervisory function, which the notion of "dispute" hardly lends itself to, especially as an arbitrator is only set up to be a judge, and if he/she ceases to be one it is difficult for him/her to remain an arbitrator.... However, it is conceivable that in Ex Post the arbitrator could perform the monitoring function often required in Compliance Law. The technique of disputes boards is inspiring in this respect. The two fields, Arbitration and Compliance, are thus destined to move closer together, as the two traditional limits, arbitrability and litigation, are in the process of evolving so that they no longer stand in the way of such rapprochements.

The author can therefore conclude: "C’est aux différents acteurs de la compliance de penser à l’arbitrage, et à la souplesse, la plasticité et la liberté qu’il offre, pour éventuellement le configurer spécialement au service des buts de la compliance." (It is up to the various players in Compliance to think about Arbitration, and the flexibility, plasticity and freedom it offers, in order to configure it specifically to serve the goals of Compliance Law).

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR. Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, coll."Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, to be published.

____

📘 At the same time, a book in English, Compliance Obligation, is published in the collection copublished by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the Éditions Bruylant.

____

🧮the book follows the cycle of colloquia 2023 organised by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and its Universities partners.

____

📚this volume is one of a series of books devoted to Compliance in this collection.

► read the presentations of the other books:

• further books:

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Le système probatoire de la Compliance, 2025

• previous books:

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche & M. Boissavy (eds.), 📕Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne - CJIP - CRPC, 2023

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕La juridictionnalisation de Compliance, 2023

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, 2022

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Les outils de la Compliance, 2021

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Pour une Europe de la Compliance, 2019

🕴️N. Borga, 🕴️J.-Cl. Marin and 🕴️J.-Ch. Roda (eds.), 📕Compliance : l'Entreprise, le Régulateur et le Juge, 2018

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Régulation, Supervision, Compliance, 2017

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Internet, espace d'interrégulation, 2016

📚see the global presentation of all the books of the collection.

___

► General presentation of this book: Compliance is sometimes presented as an inescapable mechanism , which is tantamount to seeing it as the legal Obligation par excellence, Criminal Law being its most appropriate mode of expression. But this is not so obvious. Moreover, it is becoming difficult to unify all Compliance Tools, which encompass moral representations of the world, and even cultures specific to each company, so that Law can only produce incentives or produce soft law. As a result, Compliance Obligation appears as very difficult to define.

These hesitations reflect the youth of this Compliance Law under construction. Identified through juxtaposed special laws, for each of which specialists have come forward, it is nonetheless taking shape with its own normativity, anchored in its Monumental Goals. Because the notion of Obligation is as old as Law itself, the Obligation of Compliance is confronted with all the branches of Law, and more particularly, with all due respect, with Contract and Tort Law.

But Compliance has long been a practice, effectiveness, efficacy and efficiency being among its principles. How can all these ambitious declarations be put into effect? Is there not a hint of a gap between the grandiloquence of this declared Compliance Obligation and what actually happens? The practical question of how to compel is, in this new branch of Law, a question of law.

In order to have a more accurate perception of the Obligation of Compliance and therefore to better measure its future, it is advisable to end up taking its Advanced Point, which is the Obligation of Vigilance, clearer and stronger than the other instruments, having Monumental Goals, placing the Judge more clearly at the centre, developing in an already more visible way the power of this Obligation of Compliance which abstracts itself as necessary from borders and claims to express sovereignties.

____

🏗️general construction of this Book: The book opens with a double Introduction.  The first, which is freely accessible, consists of a summary of the book, while the second, which is substantial, deals with the unified conception that we can, and indeed should, have, of the "Compliance Obligation", without losing the concrete and active character that characterises this branch of law.

The first Part of the book aims to define the Compliance Obligation. To this end, Chapter I deals with the Nature of this obligation. Chapter II deals with the Spaces of the Compliance Obligation.

The Part II aims to articulate the Compliance Obligation with other branches of Law. 

The Part III of the book looks at the way in which the possibility of obliging and the means of obliging are provided.  To this end, Chapter I deals with the Convergence of the Sources of the Compliance Obligation. Chapter II considers International Arbitration as a reinforcement of the Compliance Obligation. To this end, Chapter I deals with the Convergence of the Sources of the Compliance Obligation. Chapter II considers International Arbitration as a reinforcement of the Compliance Obligation. 

The last Part of the book is devoted to Vigilance, the leading edge of the Compliance Obligation. Chapter I is devoted to a study of the various sectors, and analyses the Intensities of the Vigilance Obligation. Chapter II deals with the Variations in Tension generated by the Vigilance Obligation. Finally, Chapter III deals with the New Modalities of the Compliance Obligation, highlighted by the Vigilance Imperative.

____

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE : VISION D’ENSEMBLE

(COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION : OVERVIEW)

Section 1 ♦️ Lignes de force de l’ouvrage L'Obligation de Compliance (Main Aspects of the Book L'Obligation de Compliance), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 2 ♦️ Concevoir l’unicité de l’Obligation de Compliance sans la diluer (Conceiving the unicity of the Compliance Obligation without diluting it), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

TITRE I.

CERNER L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE 

(IDENTIFYING THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

CHAPITRE I : LA NATURE DE L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE

(CHAPTER I: THE NATURE OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

Section 1 ♦️ La Volonté, le Cœur et le Calcul (Will, Heart and Calculation), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 2 ♦️ La dette, notion économique comme fondement de l'Obligation de Compliance (Debt, an economic concept underpinning the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Bruno Deffains

Section 3 ♦️ Obligation de Compliance et droits humains (Compliance Obligation and Human Rights), by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Racine

Section 4 ♦️ Les mutations de la souveraineté et l'Obligation de Compliance (Changes in Sovereignty and the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️René Sève

CHAPITRE II : LES ESPACES DE L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE (SPACES OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

Section 1 ♦️ Entités industrielles et Obligation de Compliance (Industrial entities and Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Etienne Maclouf

Section 2 ♦️ L'Obligation de Compliance dans les chaînes de valeur (The Compliance Obligation in Value Chains), by 🕴️Lucien Rapp

Section 3 ♦️ Compliance et conflits de lois. Le droit international de la vigilance-conformité (Compliance and conflict of laws. International Law of Vigilance-Conformity), by 🕴️Louis d'Avout 

TITRE II.

ARTICULER L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE AVEC DES BRANCHES DU DROIT

(ARTICULATING THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION WITH BRANCHES OF LAW)

Section 1 ♦️ Dimensions constitutionnelles de l'Obligation de Compliance (Constitutional dimensions of the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Stéphane Mouton

Section 2 ♦️ Droit fiscal et Obligation de Compliance (Tax Law and Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Daniel Gutmann

Section 3 ♦️ Le droit processuel, prototype de l'Obligation de Compliance (General Procedural Law, prototype of the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 4 ♦️ Le droit des sociétés et des marchés financiers face à l'Obligation de Compliance (Corporate and Financial Markets Law facing the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Anne-Valérie Le Fur

Section 5 ♦️ Le rapport entre le Droit de la responsabilité civile et l'Obligation de Compliance (The link between Tort Law and Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Jean-Sébastien Borghetti

Section 6 ♦️ Dimensions environnementales et climatiques de l'Obligation de Compliance (Environmental and Climatic Dimensions of the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Marta Torre-Schaub

Section 7 ♦️ Droit de la concurrence et Droit de la Compliance (Competition Law and Compliance Law), by 🕴️Jean-Christophe Roda

Section 8 ♦️ L'Obligation de Compliance en Droit global (The Compliance Obligation in Global Law), by 🕴️Benoît Frydman & 🕴️Alice Briegleb

Section 9 ♦️ Transformation des relations de travail et obligation de vigilance (Transformation of Labour Relations and Vigilance Obligation), by 🕴️Stéphane Vernac

Section 11 ♦️ Juge du droit des entreprises en difficulté et obligations de compliance (Judge of Insolvency Law and Compliance Obligations), by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Barbièri

TITRE III.

COMPLIANCE : DONNER ET SE DONNER LES MOYENS D’OBLIGER

(COMPLIANCE : GIVE AND TAKE THE MEANS TO OBLIGE)

CHAPITRE I : LA CONVERGENCE DES SOURCES (CONVERGENCE OF SOURCES)

Section 1 ♦️ L’Obligation de Compliance, entre volonté et consentement : obligation sur obligation vaut (Compliance Obligation, between Will and Consent: obligation upon obligation works), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 2 ♦️ Ce qu'est un engagement (What a Commitment is), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 3 ♦️ Les technologies disponibles, prescrites ou proscrites pour satisfaire Compliance et Vigilance (Technologies available, prescribed or prohibited to meet Compliance and Vigilance requirements), by 🕴️Emmanuel Netter

Section 4 ♦️ La cybersécurité et l’Obligation de Compliance (Cybersecurity and Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Michel Séjean

Section 5 ♦️ La place de l’espoir dans l’aptitude à appréhender l’avenir (The Place of Hope in the Ability to Apprehend the Future), by 🕴️

Section 6 ♦️ Contrainte légale et stratégie des entreprises en matière de Compliance (Legal Constraint and Company Strategies in Compliance matters), by 🕴️Jean-Philippe Denis & Nathalie Fabbe-Costes

Section 7 ♦️ La loi, source de l’Obligation de Compliance (The law, source of the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Blanc

Section 8 ♦️ Opposition ou convergence des systèmes juridiques dans les règles et cultures de compliance (Opposition or Convergence of Legal Systems in Compliance Rules and Cultures), by 🕴️Raphaël Gauvain & 🕴️Blanche Balian

CHAPITRE II : L’ARBITRAGE INTERNATIONAL EN RENFORT DE L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE (INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN SUPPORT OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

Section 1 ♦️ Le renforcement des engagements de Compliance par le renvoi Ex Ante à l’arbitrage international (Reinforcing Compliance Commitments by referring Ex Ante to International Arbitration"), by  

Section 2 ♦️ La condamnation en nature par le tribunal arbitral, renfort de l’Obligation de Compliance (The Arbitral Tribunal's Award in Kind, in support of the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Eduardo Silva Romero

Section 3 ♦️ L’usage de l’arbitrage international pour renforcer l’obligation de Compliance : l’exemple du secteur de la construction (The use of International Arbitration to reinforce the Compliance Obligation: the example of the construction sector), by 🕴️Christophe Lapp & 🕴️Jean-François Guillemin

Section 4 ♦️ L’arbitre, juge, superviseur, accompagnateur  ? (The Arbitrator, Judge, Supervisor, Support) , by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Racine

Section 5 ♦️ L’arbitre, organe indirect et direct de l’Obligation de Compliance ? (The Arbitrator, indirect and direct agent of the Compliance Obligation?), by 🕴️Laurent Aynès

TITRE IV.

LA VIGILANCE, POINTE AVANCÉE DE L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE

(VIGILANCE, SPEARHEAD OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

CHAPITRE I : LES INTENSITÉS DE L’OBLIGATION DE VIGILANCE, POINTE AVANCÉE DU SYSTÈME DE COMPLIANCE (INTENSITIES OF THE VIGILANCE OBLIGATION, SPEARHEAD OF THE COMPLIANCE SYSTEM)

Section 1 ♦️ Articulation systémique entre Vigilance, Due Diligence, conformité et Compliance : la Vigilance, part totale de l'Obligation de Compliance (Systemic Articulation between Vigilance, Due Diligence, Conformity and Compliance: Vigilance, Total Share of the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 2 ♦️ L’intensité de l’Obligation de Vigilance selon les secteurs : le cas des opérateurs financiers (Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Financial Operators), by 🕴️Anne-Claire Rouaud

Section 3 ♦️ L’intensité de l’Obligation de Vigilance selon les secteurs : le cas des opérateurs bancaires et d’assurance (Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Banking and Insurance Operators), by 🕴️Mathieu Françon

Section 4 ♦️ L’intensité de l’Obligation de Vigilance selon les secteurs : le cas des opérateurs numériques (Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Digital Operators), by 🕴️Grégoire Loiseau

Section 5 ♦️ L’intensité de l’Obligation de Vigilance selon les secteurs : le cas des opérateurs énergétiques (Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Energy Operators), by 🕴️Marie Lamoureux

CHAPITRE II : LES VARIATIONS DE TENSIONS ENGENDRÉES PAR L’OBLIGATION DE VIGILANCE, POINTE AVANCÉE DU SYSTÈME DE COMPLIANCE (VARIATIONS OF TENSIONS GENERATED BY THE VIGILANCE OBLIGATION, SPEARHEAD OF THE COMPLIANCE SYSTEM)

Section 1 ♦️ Repenser le concept de responsabilité civile à l’aune du devoir de vigilance, pointe avancée de la compliance (Rethinking the Concept of Civil Liability in the light of the Duty of Vigilance, Spearhead of Compliance), by 🕴️Mustapha Mekki

Section 2 ♦️ Transformation de la gouvernance et obligation de Vigilance (Transformation of Governance and Vigilance Obligation), by 🕴️Véronique Magnier

CHAPITRE III : LES MODALITÉS NOUVELLES DE L'OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE, MISES EN LUMIÈRE PAR L'IMPÉRATIF DE VIGILANCE (NEW MODALITIES OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION, HIGHLIGHTED BY THE VIGILANCE IMPERATIVE)

Section 1 ♦️ La façon dont l'impératif de Vigilance s'ajuste aux règles juridiques internationales (How the Vigilance Imperative fits in with International Legal Rules), by 🕴️Bernard Haftel

Section 2 ♦️ Contrats et clauses, mise en œuvre et modalités de l’Obligation de Vigilance (Contracts and clauses, implementation and modalities of the Vigilance Obligation), by 🕴️Gilles J. Martin

Section 3 ♦️ La preuve de la bonne exécution de la Vigilance au regard du système probatoire de Compliance (Proof that Vigilance has been properly carried out with regard to the Compliance Evidence System), by 🕴️Jean-Christophe Roda

TITRE V.

LE JUGE ET L'OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE

(THE JUDGE AND THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

Section 1 ♦️ Les enjeux présents à venir de l’articulation des principes de procédure civile et commerciale avec la logique de compliance (Present and Future Challenges of Articulating Principles of Civil and Commercial Procedure with the Logic of Compliance), by 🕴️Thibault Goujon-Bethan

Section 2 ♦️ La médiation, voie d'avenir pour une Obligation de Compliance effective (Mediation, the way forward for an Effective Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Malik Chapuis

Section 3 ♦️ Le Juge requis pour une Obligation de Compliance effective (The Judge required for an Effective Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

________

► Référence complète : Les techniques de supervision des contenus numériques disponibles sur les plateformes, in cycle de conférences-débats "Contentieux Systémique Émergent", organisé à l'initiative de la Cour d'appel de Paris, avec la Cour de cassation, la Cour d'appel de Versailles, l'École nationale de la magistrature (ENM) et l'École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris (EFB), sous la responsabilité scientifique de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, 27 mai 2024, 11h-12h30, Cour d'appel de Paris, salle Cassin

____

► Présentation de la conférence : 

____

🧮Programme de cette manifestation : 

Troisième conférence-débat

LES TECHNIQUES DE SUPERVISION DES CONTENUS NUMÉRIQUES DISPONIBLES SUR LES PLATEFORMES

Cour d’appel de Paris, salle Cassin

Présentation et modération par 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Professeure de Droit de la Régulation et de la Compliance, Directrice du Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC)

🕰️11h-11h20. 🎤Les techniques de supervision utilisées par les plateformes, intervenant à venir

🕰️11h20-11h40. 🎤Les techniques de supervision par l’autorité administrative indépendante, par 🕴️Roch-Olivier Maistre, Président de l’Autorité de régulation de la communication audiovisuelle et numérique (Arcom)

🕰️11h40-12h30. Débat

____

🔴Les inscriptions et renseignements se font à l’adresse : inscriptionscse@gmail.com

🔴Pour les avocats, les inscriptions se font à l’adresse suivante : https://evenium.events/cycle-de-conferences-contentieux-systemique-emergent/ 

⚠️Les conférences-débat se tiennent en présentiel à la Cour d’appel de Paris.

________

► Référence complète : La vigilance, nouveau champ de contentieux systémique, in cycle de conférences-débats "Contentieux Systémique Émergent", organisé à l'initiative de la Cour d'appel de Paris, avec la Cour de cassation, la Cour d'appel de Versailles, l'École nationale de la magistrature (ENM) et l'École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris (EFB), sous la responsabilité scientifique de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, 26 avril 2024, 11h-12h30, Cour d'appel de Paris, salle Massé

____

► Présentation de la conférence : Le devoir de vigilance imposé par la loi de 2017 se contractualise, soit par des contrats ad hoc, soit par des stipulations qui reproduisent les dispositions légales, les aménagent ou les dépassent. Cette reprise par le Droit des obligations est précieuse mais n’est pas sans risque. La portée systémique de la loi sous-jacente d’une part et des structures économiques d’autre part, l’entreprise ou la chaîne de valeur, va imprégner le contentieux. L’exemple des relations de travail est instructif à ce titre.

____

🧮Programme de cette manifestation : 

Deuxième conférence-débat

LA VIGILANCE, NOUVEAU CHAMP DE CONTENTIEUX SYSTÉMIQUE

Cour d’appel de Paris, salle Massé

Présentation et modération par 🕴️François Ancel, Haut Conseiller à la Première Chambre civile de la Cour de cassation

🕰️11h-11h20. 🎤Le contentieux émergent de la Vigilance dans les rapports contractuels, par 🕴️Jean-Christophe Roda, Professeur à l’Université Jean-Moulin Lyon 3

🕰️11h20-11h40. 🎤Le contentieux émergent de la Vigilance dans les relations de travail, par 🕴️Cyril Cosme, Directeur du Bureau de l'OIT pour la France

🕰️11h40-12h30. Débat

____

🔴Les inscriptions et renseignements se font à l’adresse : inscriptionscse@gmail.com

🔴Pour les avocats, les inscriptions se font à l’adresse suivante : https://evenium.events/cycle-de-conferences-contentieux-systemique-emergent/ 

⚠️Les conférences-débat se tiennent en présentiel à la Cour d’appel de Paris.

________

► Référence complète : CEDH, Grande chambre, 9 avril 2024, n°53600/20, Verein Klimaseniorinnen Schweiz et a. c/ Suisse

____

🏛️lire l'arrêt

________

🌐 follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Audition by the French National Assembly's Law Commission on the confidentiality of legal advice  (the "Legal Privilege à la française"), 8 April 2024.

____

I had expressed my opinion on the need for French legal system to better ensure the confidentiality of legal opinions drawn up by internal lawyers in companies, in an article published in 2023 in the French academic journal Recueil Dalloz: "La compliance, socle de la confidentialité nécessaire des avis juridiques élaborés en entreprise (Compliance Law, the cornerstone of the necessary confidentiality of legal opinions drawn up by companies". Compliance, the cornerstone of the necessary confidentiality of legal opinions drawn up by companies). 

Following on from this article, and as a specialist in Regulatory and Compliance Law, I was invited by the French National Assembly's Law Commission to give my opinion on the proposed law n°2022 on the confidentiality of consultations by in-house lawyers ( Proposition de loi n°2022 relative à la confidentialité des consultations des juristes d'entreprises), often named in French Legal privilege à la française.

____

► Summary of this presentation: I have shown that we must start not from the person (external lawyer / in-house lawyer, for instance) and not even centrally from the information in question (branch of Law by branch of Law), but from the Goals pursued, i.e. from Compliance Law.

In this respect, we must not be misled. We could do so by confusing mechanical "conformity" with this new branch of Law: Compliance Law. Conformity is merely a tool of Compliance Law. Out of concern for the correct use of the French language, as "Compliance" appears to many to be an American term, the proposed law uses the term "conformité" but refers to Compliance Law. Conformity" is merely the mechanical obligation to obey the applicable rules, which is the fate of any subject of law, subject to the mandatory rules, a passive position common to everyone in a State governed by the Rule of Law.

Compliance Law is quite different, with conformity being just one of its tools. On the one hand, Compliance Law imposes an active obligation, and on the other, it targets only certain legal subjects: companies.  For them, it is a matter of ensuring that certain goals set by the legislator are actually achieved, which becomes effectively and efficiently possible thanks to the power of companies (financial power, organizational power, management power, information power, location power, information power). These "Monumental Goals" are either negative (preventing systems from collapsing) or positive (ensuring that systems improve).

For companies to play this role - a role that is not required of other "ordinary" people, as they are not "in a position" to take on such a burden, particularly in terms of finance and organization - those in charge of organizing themselves and taking action, i.e. companies, must "detect and prevent" system failures (as required by laws such as US FCPA, French so-called Sapin 2 and Vigilance laws, European CSRD and CS3D, etc.). To "detect and prevent", which is an order from the Legislator, companies need to know the weaknesses of their organization and of the people they answer to, in order to remedy them: "remediation" is a "remedy" to ensure the "sustainability" of "systems".

This set of key concepts lies at the heart of Compliance Law, the branch of law That focuses on the future.

It is the legal opinions, for example, and in particular the report resulting from internal investigations, that enable those who decide and control this organization (the managers) to fulfill the role entrusted to them by the State. If these opinions are not confidential, the result is not the remediation and preservation of global systems (competitive, climatic, digital, energy, banking, financial systems, etc.): the effective managerial solution in Ex-Ante then consists not in seeking information but, conversely, in not seeking this information, since obtaining it will lead to the weakening of the company through the sanction that the information produces, for lack of confidentiality.

The interests of the system, the State and the company are disjointed, because Compliance Law implies their alliance, which is what the confidentiality of legal opinions produces.

This is why Compliance Law must, by its very nature, ensure the confidentiality of legal advice.

____

When asked about the actual text of the proposal, I felt that the explanatory memorandum was particularly relevant, since the link between Compliance Law (admittedly called "conformité" in the proposed bill by a rather too mechanical respect for the French legal language, from which the French legislator has so far been unable to dispense....) is clear, that this confidentiality is attached to the document, that the company can waive it, and that it is clearly distinct from professional secrecy, all three of which should be approved.

For my part, I've suggested a change to the procedure, which must be open to the confidentiality process.

Indeed, public authorities, such as Competition and Regulatory Authorities, are rather hostile to this confidentiality.

Having contributed a great deal to the development of Regulatory Law, and continuing to do so, I believe that Competition and Regulatory Authorities have a logic that needs to be understood. It is as follows: Regulatory Authorities are Ex-Ante (this was less true for the Competition Authorities, but it too is increasingly so) and are in a situation of information asymmetry. Their first concern is to combat this asymmetry. If we translate this into legal terms, it means that in order to carry out their mission of general interest, they must seek out all available information. However, legal opinions, and in particular the internal investigation report, are what I have described as "evidence treasure". In their logic, the Competition and Regulatory Authorities want to seize it.

There is therefore a conflict between two general interest logics: the general interest of the Monumental Goals of Compliance Law actively served by companies, at the behest of the Legislation, which requires the confidentiality of legal opinions, and the general interest of the action of Regulators who fight against information asymmetry and seek to seize the evidential treasures of legal opinions.

For the reasons given above, I believe that the Monumental Goals of Compliance must prevail. All the more so as the rights of the defence converge to this end.

Ultimately, however, it is up to the Judge, in the event of open conflict, to balance these two claims, which are based on the service of the general interest. 

However, reading the proposition, it seems to me that the rather complicated procedure entrusts this to a multiplicity of judges... But since it is indeed Compliance Law which is the best basis for "legal privilege à la française", Compliance Law, which is the extension of Regulatory Law and whose advanced point is the Vigilance duty, it would be more appropriate and logical to entrust this litigation to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Paris Judicial Court. This court has already the exclusive competence for litigation about Vigilance.

This would have another fortunate effect: on appeal, the dispute would be brought before the Paris Court of Appeal, which has exclusive jurisdiction (barring exceptions) over disputes concerning decisions on French Competition and Regulatory Authorities. The judges of the "Pôle 5" (12 chambers specializing in economic law) of the very specific court are seasoned and would be well-suited to strike the necessary balance between the two general interests involved.

I think a procedural amendment to the proposed text along these lines would be welcome.

____

► See in my work those that may be of interest with regard to this hearing (all with English summary, many with bilingual working paper) ⤵️

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Le rôle du juge dans le déploiement du Droit de la Régulation par le Droit de la Compliance, in 📗Conseil d'État et Cour de cassation, De la Régulation à la Compliance : quel rôle pour le Juge ?, 2024.  

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Compliance et conformité : les distinguer pour mieux les articuler, 2024.

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.),📕L'obligation de compliance, 2024.

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche et M. Boissavy (dir.), 📕Compliance et droits de la défense, 2024.

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), 📕Compliance et droits de la défense, Les Buts Monumentaux de la compliance,  2022.

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Contrat de compliance, clauses de compliance, 2022.

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Le Droit de la compliance, 2016.

________

► Référence complète : F. Ancel, "Quel rôle pour le juge aujourd’hui dans la compliance ? Quel office processuel du juge dans la compliance ?", in Conseil d'État et Cour de cassation, De la régulation à la compliance : quel rôle pour le juge ? Regards croisés du Conseil d'Etat et de la Cour de cassation - Colloque du 2 juin 2023, La Documentation française, coll. "Droits et Débats", 2024, pp. 101-119

____

► Résumé de l'article : 

________

► Référence complète : Conseil d'État et Cour de cassation, De la régulation à la compliance : quel rôle pour le juge ? Regards croisés du Conseil d'Etat et de la Cour de cassation, La Documentation française, coll. "Droits et Débats", 2024, 241 p.

____

📗lire la 4ième de couverture

____

📗lire la table des matières

____

► Résumé de l'ouvrage (fait par l'éditeur) : "La compliance, parfois traduite par « conformité », se situe dans le prolongement du droit de la régulation et en constitue un nouveau pas décisif. La compliance rassemble l’ensemble des mécanismes mis en œuvre au sein d’une organisation pour atteindre des objectifs d’intérêt général (sécurité, durabilité) contrant ainsi les risques systémiques. Les entreprises, s’appuyant sur les règles, normes juridiques et éthiques qui portent ces valeurs qui s’imposent à elles et leur sont internalisées, peuvent tout à la fois prévenir le risque de sanctions et participer à cette alliance entre autorités publiques, opérateurs économiques et parties prenantes pour détecter et prévenir les catastrophes systémiques futures. Organisé par le Conseil d’État et la Cour de cassation, le colloque du 2 juin 2023 analyse ce changement de paradigme créé par cette nouvelle branche du droit.". 

____

📝lire une présentation de l'article de synthèse de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche : "Le rôle du juge dans le déploiement du droit de la régulation par le droit de la compliance"

____

📝lire une présentation de l'article de François Ancel : "Quel rôle pour le juge aujourd’hui dans la compliance ? Quel office processuel du juge dans la compliance ?"

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le rôle du juge dans le déploiement du droit de la régulation par le droit de la compliance" ("Synthesis: The role of the Judge in the deployment of Regulatory Law through Compliance Law"), Synthesis in Conseil d'État (French Council of State) and Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation), De la régulation à la compliance : quel rôle pour le juge ? Regards croisés du Conseil d'Etat et de la Cour de cassation - Colloque du 2 juin 2023, La Documentation française, "Droits et Débats" Serie, 2024, pp.

____

🎥this article follows the closing speech of the biannual symposium organised by the Council of State and the Court of cassation, which in 2023 was entitled De la régulation à la compliance : quel rôle pour le juge ? (From Regulation to Compliance, what role for the judge ?)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper which is the basis of this article, with additional developments, technical references and hyperlinks

____

► Presentation of this concluding article: It is remarkable to note the unity of conception and practice between professionals who tend to work in administrative jurisdictions and professionals who tend to work in judicial jurisdictions: they all note, in similar terms, an essential movement: what Regulatory Law is, how it has been transformed into Compliance Law, and how in one and even more so in the other the Judge is at the centre of it.

Judges, as well as Regulators and European officials, explain this and use different examples to illustrate the far-reaching changes it brings to the Law and to the companies responsible for increasing the systemic effectiveness of the rules through the practice and dissemination of a Culture of Compliance.

The role of the judge participating in this Ex Ante transformation is renewed, whether he/she is a judge of Public Law or a judge of Private Law, in a greater unity of the legal system.

____

► English Summary of this article: The tug-of-war between 'Compliance' and 'conformity', which is exhausting us, obscures what is essential, i.e. the great novelty of a branch of law that assumes a humanist vision expressing the ambition to shape the future so that it is not catastrophic (preventing systems from collapsing), or even better (protecting human beings in these systems).

The article begins by describing the emergence of Compliance Law, as an extension of Regulatory Law and going beyond it. This new branch of law takes account of our new world, brings its benefits and seeks to counter these systemic dangers so that human beings could be their beneficiaries and are not crushed by them. This branch of Ex Ante Law is therefore political, often supported by public Authorities, such as Regulatory Authorities, but today it goes beyond sectors, as shown by its cutting edge, the Obligation of Vigilance.

The "Monumental Goals" in which Compliance Law is normatively anchored imply a teleological interpretation, leading to an "empowerment" of the crucial operators, not only States but also companies, responsible for the effectiveness of the many new Compliance Tools.

The article goes on to show that Judges are increasingly central to Compliance Law. Lawsuits are designed to make companies more accountable. In this transformation, the role of the judge is also to remain the guardian of the Rule of Law, both in the protection of the rights of the defence and in the protection of secrets. Efficiency is not what defines Compliance, which should not be reduced to a pure and simple method of efficiency, which would lead to being an instrument of dictatorship. This is why the principle of Proportionality is essential in the judge's review of the requirements arising from this so powerful branch of Law. 

The courts are thus faced with a new type of dispute, of a systemic nature, in their own area, which must not be distorted: the Area of Justice.

____

📝read article (in French)

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Les voies d'innovations juridiques face aux nouveaux "défis climatiques" ("Innovative legal solutions to the new "climate challenges""), in C. Arnaud, O. de Bandt et B. Deffains (dir.), Nouveaux défis - Regards croisés : Droit, Économie et Finance. Quel Droit face au Changement Climatique ? (("New challenges - Crossed perspectives : Law, Economics and Finance. What Law in the Face of Climate Change?"), Banque de France (French Central Bank) and CRED/Paris Panthéon-Assas University, Paris, Centre de Conférence de la Banque de France, April 2, 2024

____

🧮See the full programme of this event

____

🔲see the slides, basis of this conference (in French)

____

► Summary of this conference: In response to the question of how the Law can produce 'innovations' to meet the 'climate challenges', the process is based on the three traditional sources of Law, which are, firstly, laws and regulations, secondly, the commitments of individuals, mainly contracts, and thirdly, court rulings.

At first sight, the Law in its traditional conception and practice is weak in the face of climate change. This weakness is inherent in the nature of climate change, which is at once future, global and systemic, in the face of these three sources of Law, which do not address all three dimensions at once. The scale of the legal innovation required to ensure that one or more articulated sources can grasp the future, the global and the systemic is therefore clear. And yet this is what is happening.

As far as laws and regulations are concerned, they do not seem very appropriate because they are, by their very nature, a territorial limit, and international treaties are very difficult to negotiate. The interweaving of European regulations, for example the CSRD and the CS3D, which mirror each other, may be more effective. As far as 'commitments' are concerned, a concept which in Law is not very precise outside of contracts and liability cases, contracts are above all a means for companies to fulfill their legal obligations, and a contract always implies a judge. At first sight, however, the judge is the least well placed to respond to 'climate challenges', particularly in France where he is said or wished to be powerless, where he rules on the past and where, especially the civil judge, he settles a one-off dispute between two singular parties.

But a major change has occurred with the emergence of a new branch of law: the Compliance Law, a teleological branch of Law whose legal normativity is lodged in the Monumental Goals that it pursues, namely the preservation of systems, for example the climate system. In France, the so-called "Sapin 2" law in 2016, followed by the so-called "Vigilance" law in 2017, illustrate this. And the Judge is at the centre of it all.

In this global, systemic, extraterritorial perspective, the object of which is the future - Compliance Law is, moreover, rejected by many legal experts - the legislative innovation is major. Indeed, the law of 23 March 2017, known as "Vigilance" designated large companies, because they are "powerful", because they are "in a position to act" to "detect and prevent" breaches of the environment and human rights. The 2017 law copied the "compliance tools" put in place by the Sapin 2 anti-corruption law: risk mapping, plans, alerts, audits, internal investigations, and so on. 

Only large companies are subject to the Compliance Law, notably the Vigilance Law, since they are the only ones in a position to act, in this case "parent companies or principals", and borders are no longer limits since the obligation, creating personal liability for the company, extends throughout the "value chain". The notion and fact of "systemic dispute" is emerging before the courts. In France, the Paris Court of First Instance has exclusive jurisdiction. European legislation is proving more difficult to draw up, because although it is compulsory to provide information on these "extra-financial" subjects (CSRD), the directive on the duty of vigilance, which has just been adopted, does not go any further than the French law of 2017.

On the second point, that of commitments, we are only at the beginning. Judges do not transform ethical statements into "unilateral legal commitments", and vigilance does not transform company law into co-management. But contracts do form a global network through which companies adjust their various legal obligations. This is why arbitrators, the only "global judges", will soon be involved in this systemic litigation, and more general case law is to come on "contracts and compliance clauses".

But the most innovative aspect undoubtedly comes from the courts. Perhaps and notably in France because it is from where we least expect it, the civil courts, that the imagination comes, but also the guarding of the great principles of the Rule of Law, because for the moment the case law is reasonable. This innovation has not come about proprio motu: the judges are not taking action, it is the NGOs that are conducting a kind of litigation policy, systematically giving formal notice to the major energy companies, but also to the major banks and insurers on climate issues, alleging non-compliance with their vigilance plans. The interim relief judge at the Paris Court of First Instance must then provide answers in systemic disputes, of which the so-called "Total Uganda" case is an example.

The courts are demonstrating a great deal of innovation. The Court of First Instance's interim relief judge has appointed amici curiae, the Paris Court of Appeal has set up a specialised chamber, and training conferences have been set up on this "Emerging Systemic Litigation".

In conclusion, the Law is in the process of being rebuilt through a new branch of Law, the Compliance Law, whose the very purpose, as an extension of and going beyond the Regulatory Law, is to preserve systems, in particular the climate system, in a profoundly renewed role for judges.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "L’émergence du Contentieux Systémique" ("Emergence of the Systemic Litigation"), in Importance et spécificité du Contentieux Systémique Émergent (Importance and specificity of the Emerging Systemic Litigation), in cycle of conferences-debates "Contentieux Systémique Émergent" ("Emerging Systemic Litigation"), organised on the initiative of the Cour d'appel de Paris (Paris Cour of Appeal), with the Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation), the Cour d'appel de Versailles (Versailles Court of Appeal), the École nationale de la magistrature - ENM (French National School for the Judiciary) and the École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris - EFB (Paris Bar School), under the scientific direction of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, March 29, 2024, 11h-12h30, Cour d'appel de Paris, salle Masse

____

🧮see the full programme of this event

____

🧮see the programme of the entire cycle Contentieux Systémique Émergent

____

🌐consult on LinkedIn the report of this speech (in French)

____

🌐consult on LinkedIn a general présentation of this event, which links to a presentation and a report of each speech (in French)

____

🧱consult the scientific coordination sheet of this event, which gives an account of the various speeches made

____

🔲see the slides used to support this intervention (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper which is the basis of this speech

____

► English Summary of the conference: We are seeing the emergence of what should be referred to as a category of its own: the "Systemic Litigation". This concept, proposed in 2021📎!footnote-3521, refers to the hypothesis in which a system is 'involved' in a particular 'case' submitted to the judge. The presence of a system should not be confused with a systemic analysis of a phenomenon. The term 'cause' must be understood in the procedural sense, as used in article 5 of the Code civil (French Civil Code). Specifically, the prohibition contained in article 5 of the French Civil Code does not apply because a system thus involved calls for factual responses and solutions and not necessarily general and abstract solutions: the solution of a systemic nature and scope, that the presence of a system in a cause calls for, may be a factual solution, even if it radiates out from the system as a whole. But precisely because the presence of a system in the case often gives rise to a question that is itself systemic, the judge, if he wishes to comply with article 4 of the French Civil Code, must respond not only a minima by not evading the question, for example of systemic risks, but also fully by providing systemic solutions, for example remedies to preserve in the future the solidity and durability of the systems involved in the case. 

These systems may be of different kinds: banking, financial, transport, health, energy, digital, algorithmic or climatic. Their presence in cases brought to the attention of judges, the variety and difficulties of which will be seen in later contributions, leads to basic questions relating to the emergence of Systemic Litigation: firstly, how can Systemic Litigation be defined? Secondly, what makes this category of litigation emerge? The answers to these two questions have essential practical consequences. 

The new solutions must be based on a classic distinction, used in particular in criminal and administrative proceedings, which are more objective, but also in civil proceedings, notably by Hébraud, namely the distinction between the "party to the dispute/litigation" and the "party to the proceedings". Depending on whether it is accepted that the system should be considered as a "party to the litigation", which would allow it, through an entity that is legitimate in expressing it, to allege claims and formulate demands against an adversary, or as a "party to the proceedings", a much broader category, which would allow the judge to hear the interests of the systems involved without individuals being able, on behalf of a system, to formulate claims against or for the benefit of a party to the litigation.

This makes it possible to innovate while preserving the measure of which the judge is the guardian.

________

► Full Reference: Importance et spécificité du Contentieux Systémique Émergent (Importance and specificity of the Emerging Systemic Litigation), in cycle of conference-debates "Contentieux Systémique Émergent" ("Emerging Systemic Litigation"), organised on the initiative of the Cour d'appel de Paris (Paris Cour of Appeal), with the Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation), the Cour d'appel de Versailles (Versailles Court of Appeal), the École nationale de la magistrature - ENM (French National School for the Judiciary) and the École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris - EFB (Paris Bar School), under the scientific direction of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, March 29, 2024, 11h-12h30, Cour d'appel de Paris, Masse room

____

► Presentation of the conference-debate: The "Systemic Litigation" is emerging. Through and beyond the dispute, a system is involved: the banking, financial, digital, health and climate systems. How can such litigation be recognised? How do you make room for a system in a court of law? What can be done when several systems are in conflict? Who represents these systems and their interests? How can the temporality of systems and litigation be reconciled? In practical terms, the magistrate has a new role. Whether they are prosecutors or judges, they deal with systemic litigation in criminal, civil, commercial and other areas.

____

🎤see the detailed presentation of the first speech of 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche : L'émergence du Contentieux Systémique (The Emergence of Systemic Litigation)

____

🧮Programme of this event: 

Inaugural Conference

IMPORTANCE ET SPÉCIFICITÉ DU CONTENTIEUX SYSTÉMIQUE ÉMERGENT

(IMPORTANCE AND SPECIFICITY OF THE EMERGING SYSTEMIC LITIGATION)

Cour d’appel de Paris (Paris Court of Appeal), Masse room

🕰️11h-11h20. 🎤L’émergence du contentieux systémique (The Emergence of the Systemic Litigation), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Professor of Regulatory and Compliance Law, Director if the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC)

🕰️11h20-11h40. 🎤L’office du magistrat du parquet dans le contentieux systémique (The role of the Public Prosecutor in Systemic Litigation), by 🕴️François Vaissette, Avocat général près la Cour d’appel de Paris (Advocate General at the Paris Court of Appeal)

🕰️11h40-12h30. Debate

____

🔴Registrations and information requests can be sent to: inscriptionscse@gmail.com

🔴For the attorneys, registrations have to be sent to the following address: https://evenium.events/cycle-de-conferences-contentieux-systemique-emergent/ 

⚠️The conference-debates are held in person only, in the Cour d’appel de Paris (Paris Court of Appeal).

____

🧮Read below a detailed presentation of this event⤵️

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, ""Nous voyons émerger aujourd’hui le contentieux systémique"" (""We are now seeing the emergence of the Systemic Litigation""), interview with Olivia Dufour, counterpoint to the interview with the Premier Président de la Cour d'appel de Paris (First President of the Paris Court of Appeal) Jacques Boulard, "Contentieux systémique : "Il est important, pour les magistrats, de rester au plus près des réalités"" ("Systemic litigation: "It is important for judges to remain as close as possible to reality""), Actu-Juridique, March 28, 2024

____

💬read the interview (in French)

____

This interview is a counterpoint to the interview conducted with Jacques Boulard, Premier Président de la Cour d'appel de Paris (First President of the Paris Court of Appeal), on the Court of Appeal's threefold initiative in establishing the Conseil de Justice Économique - CJE (Economic Justice Council), the additional chamber (5-12) to hear vigilance litigation in particular  and the setting up of the series of conference-debates on the Contentieux Systémique Émergent (Emerging Systemic Litigation): read the interview (in French).

This interview highlights Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's position at the Conseil de Justice Économique and her role as scientific director of the series of conference-debates. 

As a counterpoint, the journal conducts a specific interview with Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on the specific issue of the Contentieux Systémique Émergent (Emerging Systemic Litigation) cycle.

____

► Presentation of the interview by the journal : "Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, professeur de droit de la régulation et de la compliance et responsable scientifique du cycle « Contentieux systémique émergent » nous explique la notion de contentieux systémique et l’importance de la démarche engagée par le Premier président."

(Free translation : "Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Professor of Regulatory Law and Compliance Law and Scientific Director of the "Contentieux systémique émergent" ("Emerging Systemic Litigation") cycle, explains the concept of Systemic Litigation and the importance of the approach adopted by the First President.")

____

For the record, the 2024 conference-debates of the "Contentieux systémique émergent" ("Emerging Systemic Litigation") cycle:

• Conférence inaugurale – Vendredi 29 mars 2024, de 11h à 12h30, IMPORTANCE ET SPÉCIFICITÉ DU CONTENTIEUX SYSTÉMIQUE ÉMERGENT
   
• Deuxième conférence – Vendredi 26 avril 2024, de 11h à 12h30, LA VIGILANCE, NOUVEAU CHAMP DE CONTENTIEUX SYSTÉMIQUE
   
• Troisième conférence – Lundi 27 mai 2024, de 11h à 12h30, LES TECHNIQUES DE SUPERVISION DES CONTENUS NUMÉRIQUES DISPONIBLES SUR LES PLATEFORMES
   
• Quatrième conférence – Lundi 24 juin 2024, de 11h à 12h30, L’INTELLIGENCE ARTIFICIELLE, NOUVEAU CHAMP DE CONTENTIEUX SYSTÉMIQUE
   
• Cinquième conférence – Lundi 9 septembre 2024, de 11h à 12h30, LA PORTÉE DES NORMES DE DROIT DUR, DE DROIT SOUPLE ET DES NORMES TECHNIQUES DANS LE CONTENTIEUX SYSTÉMIQUE ÉMERGENT
   
• Sixième conférence – Lundi 14 octobre 2024, de 11h à 12h30, LES TECHNIQUES PROBATOIRES ADÉQUATES DANS LE CONTENTIEUX SYSTÉMIQUE ÉMERGENT
   
• Septième conférence – Lundi 18 novembre 2024, de 11h à 12h30, DISCUSSION OUVERTE
   
• Conférence de clôture de l’année 2024 – Lundi 16 décembre 2024, de 16h à 18h, L’EXPÉRIENCE DES JURIDICTIONS DANS LE CONTENTIEUX SYSTÉMIQUE ÉMERGENT

____

► For the record, presentation of the interview of the Premier Président (First President) by the journal (in French): "Vendredi 29 mars aura lieu la première conférence-débat du cycle de formation « Contentieux systémique émergent » à la Cour d’appel de Paris. Cette initiative s’inscrit dans le cadre d’une politique qui a menée à la création d’un Conseil de justice économique ainsi qu’à la mise en place d’une nouvelle chambre dédiée au devoir de vigilance et à la responsabilité écologique. Le Premier président de la Cour d’appel de Paris, Jacques Boulard, nous explique les objectifs et les enjeux de ces innovations.".

____

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "You Porn : La CJUE face au défi de la protection des mineurs" ("You Porn: The CJEU faces the challenge of protecting minors"), interview with Olivia Dufour, Actu-Juridique, March 11, 2024

____

💬read the interview (in French)

____

► Presentation of the interview by the journal (in French): "Depuis bientôt deux ans, l’Arcom tente de contraindre les sites pornographiques à mettre en place des procédés techniques sérieux de contrôle d’âge des internautes qui accèdent à leurs sites, afin que la protection des mineurs organisée par le droit pénal soit effective. Il y a à la fois une procédure civile en cours, basée notamment sur le décret qui met en œuvre ce dispositif, et un recours administratif, contestant la légalité du décret sur lequel s’appuie le régulateur pour mettre en demeure les sites d’adopter ces dispositifs techniques. Dans ce dernier contentieux, le Conseil d’État a, par sa décision du 6 mars 2024, adressé plusieurs questions préjudicielles à la CJUE pour déterminer quelle était la marge de manœuvre des États membres à l’encontre des sites qui ne respectent pas leur législation. Nous avons demandé au professeur Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, spécialiste de droit de la compliance, de nous éclairer sur les enjeux de ce contentieux hors normes.".

____

► Questions asked (in French): 

• Pouvez-vous nous rappeler brièvement la genèse de ce cas manifestement complexe ?
• C’est la première fois qu’apparaît dans une décision de justice la notion de « cause systémique » dont vous êtes l’auteure. De quoi s’agit-il exactement ?
• Sur ces entrefaites, une décision de la CJUE est venue bouleverser la donne…
• Revenons au recours devant le Conseil d’État contre le décret, il semble que le Conseil d’État avait donc le choix entre deux solutions : suivre la CJUE et donc renoncer à protéger les enfants de la pornographie en France ou bien s’émanciper de cette jurisprudence européenne au risque de se le voir reprocher. Qu’a-t-il décidé finalement ?

________