Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Ne pas confondre process de conformité et Droit de la Compliance: les conséquences pratiques (Don't confuse compliance processes with compliance law: practical consequences)", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, May 5, 2024

____

📧Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

► News summary : Reducing Compliance to conformity processes can be fatal for companies.

Reading Norbert Alter's book on management in a two-pronged movement which, according to the author, has consisted on the one hand in draining companies of all process and control, and on the other hand in injecting learning about ethics, benevolence and concern for others, has been detrimental in that the first movement has systemically destroyed meaning, meaning which is then so difficult to inculcate.

This is very instructive if we look at it from a legal perspective: in effect, it corresponds to what is happening between Compliance Law and Compliance Processes.

In the latter case, we might even consider that it is “liability” in the legal sense that is at stake: the company would incur liability at the slightest failure of the non-compliance process, whereas Compliance Law, a branch teleologically built on the Monumental Goals that constitute its legal standards (preservation of systems, e.g. banking, financial, health, energy, digital, climate systems, etc.), implies only an obligation of means. Compliance law does not require companies to follow processes blindly and to the letter, but to demonstrate the effects that have already been achieved and that it is reasonably plausible that they will achieve in the future. In this respect, compliance is essentially a probationary obligation.

____

📧read the article published on 5 May 2024 on this topic in the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation ⤵️

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne - CJIP - CRPC : les lignes de force de l'ouvrage (Compliance and rights of the defence. Internal investigation – French Judicial Public Interest Agreement – French guilty plea procedure : the main themes of the book), Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, March 5, 2024

____

📧Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Comment articuler Compliance et droits de la défense ?" ("How to articulate Compliance and rights of the defence"), Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, December 10, 2023

____

📧Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🧱Acknowledging their specific characteristics to better articulate Compliance and the rights of the defence

The book, Compliance et droits de la défense (Compliance and the rights of the defence), co-edited by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, deals with their relationship per se, a relationship illustrated by the internal investigation, the CJIP and the CRPC. Its aim is to explain what Compliance Law is and what the rights of the defence are, in order to find better ways of articulating them: sometimes to rank them, more often to find their points of contact and increase them. Above all, the starting point must be practice.

____

📧read the article published on 10 December 2023 on this topic in the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation ⤵️

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance, Vigilance et Médiation (🧮30 novembre 2023)", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 6 novembre 2023

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🧱La médiation, un outil efficace et déjà éprouvé en matière de Vigilance

Le devoir de vigilance est la pointe avancée du droit de la compliance. La médiation commence déjà à montrer son efficacité pour la mise en oeuvre délicate voir controversée de la technique nouvelle de Vigilance.

____

📧voilà le programme détaillé du colloque que le Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et le Conseil national des barreaux (CNB) organisent le 30 novembre 2023 sur le sujet, incluant les modalités d'inscription ⤵️

♾️suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance & Contrat / lien entre Consentement et Volonté ; enjeu de responsabilité personnelle : CNIL, 15 juin 2023, Criteo", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 15 juillet 2023.

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🧱L'obligation légale de Compliance doit être exécutée grâce à des contrats, mais l'on ne peut s'en décharger par des contrats : CNIL, 15 juin 2023, Criteo 

____

📧lire l'article ⤵️

♾️suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Présent et avenir des "causes systémiques" : cas des sites pornos (jugement 7 juillet 2023)", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 8 juillet 2023.

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🧱Consécration de la notion proposée de "cause systémique" dans les contentieux de Droit de la compliance : jugement du Tribunal judiciaire de Paris du 7 juillet 2023, "Youporn" (Arcom c/ Orange et autres)

Ce jugement remet de l'ordre et sursoit à statuer pour permettre au Conseil d'État de statuer sur ce qui est la même question impliquant le système numérique, les obligations des plateformes, la technologie. L'office du juge est en pleine transformation lorsque la Compliance est impliquée et que les systèmes eux-mêmes sont en jeu. 

____

📧lire l'article ⤵️

♾️suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance. CJIP : le calcul de l'amende d'intérêt public / CJIP, Vercel (Lactalis), 30 mars 2023", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 3 juillet 2023.

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🧱 Si l'entreprise n'a pas directement gagné d'argent, quel peut être le montant de l'amende d'intérêt public fixé par une CJIP ? Analyse de la CJIP du 30 mars 2023 Groupe Lactalis, validée par l'ordonnance du Président du Tribunal de Besançon du 1ier juin 2023. 

____

📧lire l'article ⤵️

♾️suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Interrégulation : rapport du "pôle commun" entre l'AMF et l'ACPR, reflet d'un phénomène général à tous les secteurs et toutes les autorités", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 28 juin 2023.

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🔴Interrégulation, voie d'ajustement de la Régulation à un monde changé 

L'interrégulation, articulée au Droit souple, est la voie qui permet de conserver la spécificité du Droit de la Régulation, aujourd'hui prolongée par le Droit de la Compliance, tout en répondant à un monde dont le numérique efface les frontières en y imposant pourtant une conception souveraine des politiques : exemple du Rapport annuel publié par le "pôle commun" publié par l'Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF) et l'Autorité de contrôle prudentiel et de résolution (ACPR) en juin 2023. 

____

📧lire l'article ⤵️

♾️suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "S'engager n'est pas contracter (décision du Conseil d'État du 21 avril 2023, Orange c/ Arcep)", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 28 juin 2023.

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🔴Engagements, acceptation, convention : multiplication de ces actes de volonté acceptés qui ne sont pourtant pas des contrats et échappent à leurs principes

Dans sa décision du 21 avril 2023, société Orangec/ Arcep, le Conseil d'État dit ce que ne constitue pas les engagements souscrits par l'opérateurs pour le déploiement de la fibre, acceptés par le ministre : ce n'est pas un contrat. La "qualification négative" est donc donnée. Mais alors qu'est-ce que c'est ?

____

📧lire l'article ⤵️

♾️suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Message personnel", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 7 juin 2023.

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🔴 Message personnel sur la construction du Droit de la Compliance

____

📧lire l'article ⤵️

♾️suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance : obligation, devoir, pouvoir, culture (colloque 13 et 14 juin 2023)", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 6 juin 2023.

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🔴 Comprendre l'Obligation de Compliance afin d'en maîtriser la pratique (colloque des 13 et 14 juin 2023 du Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC), du Centre de recherche sur la justice et le règlement des conflits (CRJ) et du Centre de recherche en économie et droit (CRED) de l'Université Paris Panthéon-Assas).

La compliance parait inmaîtrisable dans sa diversité et son ampleur et l'on doute parfois de sa juridicité.
Pour favoriser la maîtrise de cette pratique et construire le Droit de la Compliance, il est essentiel de mieux cerner l'Obligation de compliance.
C'est l'objet de ce colloque.

____

📧lire l'article ⤵️

♾️suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance-Vigilance-Régulation : que feront les juges demain ? Juges administratif, civil, pénal, commercial, européen, etc. Colloque 2 juin 2023", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 29 mai 2023.

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🔴 Ce que les juges ont à nous dire sur la Compliance et la Régulation (2 juin 2023) 

Chacun perçoit que les juges sont très puissants dans le Droit de la compliance, par exemple dans le numérique ou en matière de vigilance. Ils le sont aujourd'hui, le seront encore plus demain. Mais comment vont-ils exercer cette puissance, comment conçoivent-ils leur rôle, comment vont-ils exercer leur office face aux régulateurs, aux entreprises, aux personnes impliqués dans des systèmes technologiques qui risquent de nous dépasser ? Le 2 juin 2023 le Conseil d'État et la Cour de cassation se réunissent pour discuter et formuler le rôle du juge dans ce passage qui s'opère du Droit de la régulation au Droit de la compliance. J'attends d'apprendre à travers ce que je vais écouter toute la journée et explicite ici le contenu, les enjeux et les modalités d'inscription de ce colloque conçu par nos deux Hautes juridictions.

____

📧lire l'article ⤵️

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le PNF devrait avoir ouvertement compétence en matière de CJIP environnementale : la CJIP "Guy Dauphin Environnement" du 17 mai 2023" ("The French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office should have open jurisdiction over environmental Judicial Public Interest Agreement: the "Guy Dauphin Environnement" Judicial Public Interest Agreement of 17 May 2023"), Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 20 May 2023.

____

📧Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🔴 The Judicial Public Interest Agreement GDE of 15 May 2023 or how the French National Prosecutor's Office is rightly meddling in Environmental Compliance

The Parquet National Financier (French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office) does not have jurisdiction over environmental matters, and this is regrettable. For it is very well placed to obtain, in particular for the benefit of associations, adequate measures for the future, which refers to the definition of Compliance Law. This is what he is actually achieving through the Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public - CJIP (Judicial Public Interest Agreement) GDE.

____

📧read the article ⤵️

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Pour un consommateur "vigilant" : l'éduquer. Analyse juridique" ("For a "vigilant" consumer: educate him. Legal analysis"), Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 18 April 2023.

____

📧Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🔴For an efficient Compliance Law: an Ex Ante responsibility in alliance with consumer expectations 

A survey confirms that consumers integrate the monumental goals that generate compliance duties and obligations on the companies that sell them products. But this does not create a duty on them to prefer these products over others: they do not feel "responsible" for them. Compliance Law is based on ex ante responsibility and shared duty. So, faced with this attitude, what can the Law do?

____

📧read the article ⤵️ 

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Dans les causes systémiques : "délibérer" plutôt que "se disputer"" ("In systemic causes: 'deliberate' rather than 'argue'"), Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 17 April 2023.

____

📧Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🔴To deal with "systemic causes", including systemic cases of compliance, move from "argument" to "deliberation" from the start

Compliance Law involves systems, for example banking, financial, digital, health, etc. When a dispute is brought before a judge, this dimension remains, whether before a judge of the Law or a judge of the merits, whether before a civil, criminal, commercial, administrative or European judge, etc. The judge's office must be adapted accordingly. And this is in the process of being done.

____

📧read the article ⤵️ 

🌐 follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐 subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "La "rationalité délibérative" et l'usage adéquat de l'impératif de vigilance" (""Deliberative rationality" and the proper use of the vigilance imperative"), Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 6 April 2023.

____

📧Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

🔴The deliberative public space, a model method for the implementation of the duty of vigilance

In this new article of April 6, 2023 of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, the political philosophy construction that Habermas exposes about social networks and the method that the implementation of the duty of vigilance requires are correlated. Indeed, Habermas continues to advocate a space for discussion, contradiction, deliberation, opinion that can act with rationality. Communication and mediation are essential to ensure that the future, which is the object of vigilance, will not be a catastrophe: this monumental goal of compliance, of which Vigilance is a part, implies it.

____

📧read the article ⤵️ 

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Face aux clauses de Compliance : le Juge (colloque du 7 avril 2023)" ("Facing Compliance clauses: the Judge (symposium of 7 April 2023)"), Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 4 April 2023.

____

📧Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

Compliance Law is starting to be known; mainly through two blocks:

Firstly the spectacular sanctions by which it made as its entry in Europe by the "BNPP sanction" of 2014.

🔴M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Le Droit de la Compliance, 2016

Secondly, the accumulation of tools, legal and non-legal, with which companies have equipped themselves: plans to detect and prevent breaches, internal investigations, mapping, ad hoc training, etc.

🔴M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir), 📘Compliance Tools, 2021

But what is the "compliance obligation" in the name of which these fearful and heavy sanctions are pronounced and these new and multiple tools are put in place?

We do not have a very clear idea.

That is why the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and its partner universities have chosen to focus on the topic of the Compliance Obligation in a series of symposiums held in 2023.

🔴JoRC, 🏗️L'obligation de compliance, 2023

It could be said that the company is "obliged" by Compliance because it is obliged by the Law, as Compliance would only mean obeying "regulations" (a term used to describe everything that is obligatory, from the Constitution to ethical charters, etc.). The English vocabulary "comply with" suggests this, as does the Chinese practice of Compliance. The difference would then only be the fact that the company shows its "stakeholders" that it does in fact respect all these texts that commit it.

But the practice and the jurist remember that what is sometimes considered as the heart of the Law, since Roman Law, is Obligations Law, having as its object Contract Law and Tort Law.

Yet, in practice, companies have put contracts concerning compliance everywhere, and they are relatively little studied.

🔴M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Contrat de compliance, clauses de compliance, 2023

These may be entire contracts whose very purpose is to entrust another with the task of fulfilling all or part of the compliance obligation incumbent on the company, with regard to personal data.

These may be clauses inserted in contracts with another purpose, for instance sales contracts in a value chain, where the company stipulates that the other company will also ensure compliance obligations for itself or for the other company, e.g. detect and prevent corruption, be vigilant, etc.

Contract Law has already taken on compliance in practice, especially in long-term economic transactions with an international dimension.

The judge has always been present in Obligation Law.

How is the triangle articulated: Judge - Compliance - Obligation?

The Judge has been present from the outset in the development of the Compliance Obligation through criminal liability, administrative liability and the obligation for the company to become a judge of itself, particularly through internal investigations.

🔴M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, 2023

The Judge is also present through Obligation Law stricto sensu, first of all through liability, which is transformed under the effect of the compliance system, which operates more in the logic of "accountability" and generates legal mechanisms of "ex ante liability".

🔴M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝La responsabilité Ex Ante, pilier du Droit de la Compliance, 2022

In contractual matters, the Judge will intervene, in particular with regard to the stipulations which, in the contracts which form the architecture of the value chains, ensure the efficacy (and no longer only the effectiveness) of the duty of vigilance.

The Judge will then intervene under the French law of 2017, known as the "Vigilance Law",

🔴M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🚧Vigilance, Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance et "Société vigilante", 2023

but also, because the Judge is the "judge of the contract", he will intervene as such.

To identify the Obligation of Compliance, 

🔴M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), 📘Compliance Obligation, 2024

it is therefore necessary to analyse the way in which the Judge apprehends or should in the future apprehend contracts and compliance clauses.

That's why, in the above-mentioned cycle of symposiums, a symposium is being held on 7 April 2023. It is co-organised by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the Law Faculty of Perpignan, and has been designed under the scientific direction of Walid Chaiehloudj and Marie-Anne Frison-Roche.

🧮Le juge face aux clauses et aux contrats de compliance (The Judge facing clauses and contrats of compliance)

________

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Why do we regulate? If it is to prevent systemic risks, systemic "family offices" must be subject to it (Archegos case) (Pourquoi régule-t-on? Si c'est pour prévenir les risques systémiques, les "family offices" systémiques doivent y être soumis (cas Archegos)), Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 30th of March 2021

Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Summary of the news: 

Archegos was a wealth management company whose activity consisted mainly in managing funds that were not themselves from the financial markets (hence its title of "family office"). Obviously, Archegos was proving to be too fragile financially in view of the highly speculative commitments it made on the financial markets and systemic banks were particularly deeply affected by the liquidation of large amounts by Archegos to be able to respond to margin calls.

As the mandate of the financial regulatory authorities is aimed almost exclusively at the protection of public savings, Archegos completely escaped the regulation and supervision of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). However, Regulation Law also aims to prevent and manage systemic risks, which are often multi-sectoral and even trans-sectoral, and this in a teleological way. In view of this and the increasingly important place taken by speculative behavior in the financial markets, the financial regulatory authorities must give up the condition of using public savings in their consideration of operators which should be regulated because even an operator not handling public savings can threaten the existence of financial markets. From this perspective, "family offices", not handling public savings but having a systemic dimension, must come under the regulation and supervision of financial regulatory authorities.

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., New SEC Report to Congress about Whistleblower Program: what is common between American and European conception, Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 1st of December 2020

Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Summary of the news

Like every year since the adoption of the Dodd-Frank Act, the Securities and Exchanges Commission (SEC) and especially its Office of the Whistleblowers (OWB) handed to the Congress of the United-States a report about the success of its program concerning whistleblowers, especially estimated with the amount of financial rewards granted to them during the year. This report especially presents the amount granted to whistleblowers, the quality of the collected information and the efficacy of SEC's whistleblowers' protection process.

If Americans condition the effectiveness of whistleblowing to the remuneration of whistleblowers, Europeans oppose the "ethical whistleblower" who shares information for the love of Law to the "bounty hunter" uniquely motivated by financial reward and favor the former to the later, as it is proven in the French Law Sapin II of 2016 (which do not propose financial reward to whistleblowers) or the British Public Interest Disclosure of 1998 (which just propose a financial compensation of the whistleblower's losses linked to whistleblowing). 

However, American and European conceptions are not so far from each other. As United-States, Europe has a real care for legal effectivity, even if, because of their different legal traditions, Americans favor effectivity of rights while European favor effectivity of Law. If it places effectivity at the center of its preoccupations, Europe should conceive with less aversion the possibility to financially incite whistleblowers. Moreover, United-States and Europe share the same common willingness to protect whistleblowers and if rewarding would enable a better protection, then Europe should not reject it, as shows the recent declarations of the French Defenders of Rights. It is not excluded that both systems converges in a close future. 

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Due process and Personal Data Compliance Law: same rules, one Goal (CJEU, Order, October 29, 2020, Facebook Ireland Ltd v/ E.C.), Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 1st of November 2020

Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Read Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's interview in Actu-juridiques about this decision (in French)

Summary of the news: 

As part of a procedure initiated for anti-competitive behaviors, the European Commission has three times requested, between the 13th of March and the 11th of November 2019, from Facebook the communication of information, reitarated in a decision in May 2020.  

Facebook contests it alleging that the requested documents would contain sensitive personal information that a transmission to the Commission would make accessible to a too broad number of observers, while "the documents requested under the contested decision were identified on the basis of wideranging search terms, (...) there is strong likelihood that many of those documents will not be necessary for the purposes of the Commission’s investigation". 

The contestation therefore evokes the violation of the principles of necessity and proportionality but also of due process because these probatory elements are collected without any protection and used afterwards. Moreover, Facebook invokes what would be the violation of a right to the respect of personal data of its employees whose the emails are transferred. 

The court reminds that the office of the judge is here constraint by the condition of emergency to adopt a temporary measure, acceptable by the way only if there is an imminent and irreversible damage. It underlines that public authorities benefit of a presumption of legality when they act and can obtain and use personal data since this is necessary to their function of public interest. Many allegations of Facebook are rejected as being hypothetical. 

But the Court analyzes the integrality of the evoked principles with regards with the very concrete case. But, crossing these principles and rights in question, the Court estimates that the European Commission did not respect the principle of necessity and proportionality concerning employees' very sensitive data, these demands broadening the circle of information without necessity and in a disproportionate way, since the information is very sensitive (like employees' health, political opinions of third parties, etc.). 

It is therefore appropriate to distinguish among the mass of required documents, for which the same guarantee must be given in a technique of communication than in a technic of inspection, those which are transferable without additional precaution and those which must be subject to an "alternative procedure" because of their nature of very sensitive personal data. 

This "alternative procedure" will take the shape of an examination of documents considered by Facebook as very sensitive and that it will communicate on a separate electronic support, by European Commission's agents, that we cannot a priori suspect to hijack law. This examination will take place in a "virtual data room" with Facebook's attorneys. In case of disagreement between Facebook and the investigators, the dispute could be solved by the director of information, communication and medias of the Directorate-General for Competition of the European Commission. 

___

We can draw three lessons from this ordinance: 

1. This decision shows that Procedural Law and Compliance Law are not opposed. Some often say that Compliance guarantees the efficacy and that Procedure guarantees fundamental rights, the protection of the one must result in the diminution of the guarantee of the other. It is false. As this decision shows it, through the key notion of sensitive personal data protection (heart of Compliance Law) and the care for procedure (equivalence between communication and inspection procedures; contradictory organization of the examination of sensitive personal data), we see once again that two branches of Law express the same care, have the same objective: protecting people. 
2. The judge is able to immediately find an operational solution, proposing "an alternative procedure" axed around the principle of contradictory and conciliating Commision's and Facebook's interests has shown that it was able to bring alternative solutions to the one it suspends the execution, appropriate solution to the situation and which equilibrate the interest of both parties. 
3. The best Ex Ante is the one which anticipate the Ex Post by the pre-constitution of evidence. Thus the firm must be able to prove later the concern that it had for human rights, here of employees, to not being exposed to sanctioning pubic authorities. This Ex Ante probatory culture is required not only from firms but also from public authorities which also have to give justification of their action. 

__________

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., From Competition Law to Compliance Law: example of French Competition Authority decision on central purchasing body in Mass Distribution, Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 27th of October 2020

Read by freely subscribing the other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance

_____

Summary of the news: Through its decision of 22nd of October 2020, the Autorité de la concurrence (French Competition Authority) accepted the commitments proposed by retail sector's firms Casino, Auchan, Metro and Schiever so that their agreement by which a common body centralizes purchases from numerous retailers, allowing each to offer these products under private label, is admissible with regard to competitive requirements. 

In this particular case, the Authority had self-sized in July 2018, estimating that such a purchase center could harm competition, opening immediately a large consultation on the terms of the contract. In October 2018, the law Egalim permitted to the Authority to take temporary measures to suspend such a contract, what the Authority did from September. 

The convention parties' firms committed on the one hand to update their contract limiting the power on suppliers, especially small and very small suppliers, excluding totally of the field of the contract some kind of products, especially food products and reducing the share of bought products volume dedicated to their transformation in distributor brand. 

The Autorité de la concurrence accepts this proposal of commitments, congratulates itself of the protection of small suppliers operating like that and observe the similarity with the contract consisting in a purchase center between Carrefour and Tesco, which will be examined soon. 

_____

We can draw three lessons of this innovating decision, which could be a model for after: 

1. The technique of Compliance Law permits to the Autorité de la concurrence to find a reasonable solution for the future. 

• Indeed, rather than punishing much later by a simple fine or to annihilate the performing mechanism of the purchase center, the Authority obtains contract modifications. 
• The contract is structured and the obtained modifications are also structural. 
• The commitments are an Ex Ante technique, imposed to operators, for the future, in an equilibrium between competition, operators and consumers protection and the efficacy of the coordination between powerful operators. 
• The nomination of a monitor permits to build the future of the sector, thanks to the Ex Ante nature of Compliance Law. 

2. The retail sector finally regulated by Compliance technics.

• "Distribution law" always struggle to find its place, between Competition law and Contract Law, especially because we cannot consider it as a common "sector". 
• The Conseil constitutionnel (French constitutional court) refused a structural injunction power to the authority because it was contrary to business freedom and without any doubt ethics of business is not sufficient to the equilibrium of the sector.
• Through commitments given against a stop of pursuits relying on structuring contracts, it is by Compliance law that a Regulation law free of the condition of existence of a sector could leave.

3. The political nature of Compliance law in the retail sector

• As for digital space, which is not a sector, Compliance law can directly impose to actors imperatives that are strangers to them. 
• In the digital space, the care for fighting against Hate and for protecting private life; here the care for small and very small suppliers. 

___________

See in counterpoints the pursuit of a contentious procedure against Sony, whose the proposals of commitments, made after a public consultation, were not found satisfying.

To go further, on the question of Compliance law permitting through indirect way the rewriting by the Conseil of a structuring contract (linking a platform created by the State to centralize health data with an American firm subsidy to manage them).

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Conditions for the legality of a platform managed by an American company hosting European health data​: French Conseil d'Etat decision, Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 19th of October 2020

Read by freely subscribing the other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

___

News Summary: In its ordinance of 13th of October 2020, Conseil national du logiciel libre (called Health Data Hub), the Conseil d'Etat (French Administrative Supreme Court) has determined the legal rules governing the possibility to give the management of sensitive data on a platform to a non-europeans firm, through the specific case of the decree and of the contract by which the management of the platform centralizing health data to fight against Covid-19 has been given to the Irish subsidiary of an American firm, Microsoft. 

The Conseil d'Etat used firstly CJEU case law, especially the decision of 16th of July 2020, called Schrems 2, in the light of which it was interpreted and French Law and the contract linking GIP and

The Conseil d'Etat concluded that it was not possible to transfer this data to United-Sates, that the contract could be only interpreted like this and that decree and contract's modifications secured this. But it observed that the risk of obtention by American public authorities was remaining. 

Because public order requires the maintenance of this platform and that it does not exist for the moment other technical solution, the Conseil d'Etat maintained the principle of its management by Microsoft, until a European operator is found. During this, the control by the CNIL (French Data Regulator), whose the observations has been taken into consideration, will be operated. 

We can retain three lessons from this great decision:

• There is a perfect continuum between Ex Ante and Ex Post, because by a referred, the Conseil d'Etat succeed in obtaining an update of the decree, a modification of the contractual clauses by Microsoft and of the words of the Minister in order to, as soon as possible, the platform is managed by an European operator. Thus, because it is Compliance Law, the relevant time of the judge is the future. 
• The Conseil d'Etat put the protection of people at the heart of its reasoning, what is compliant to the definition of Compliance Law. It succeeded to solve the dilemma: either protecting people thanks to the person to fight against the virus, or protecting people by preventing the centralization of data and their captation by American public authorities. Through a "political" decision, that is an action for the future, the Conseil found a provisional solution to protect people against the disease and against the dispossession of their data, requiring that an European solution is found. 
• The Conseil d'Etat emphasized the Court of Justice of The European Union as the alpha and omega of Compliance Law. By interpreting the contract between a GIP (Public interest Group) and an Irish subsidy of an American group only with regards to the case law of the Court of Justice of European Union, the Conseil d'Etat shows that sovereign Europe of Data can be built. And that courts are at the heart of this. 

___________

Read the interview given on this Ordinance Health Data Hub

To go further about the question of Compliance Law concerning health data protection, read the news of 25th of August 2020: The always in expansion "Right to be Forgotten"​: a legitimate Oxymore in Compliance Law built on Information. Example of​ Cancer Survivors Protection 

Full Reference : Frison-Roche, M.-A.,Attorney's Professional Secret & Filter mechanism in balance with fighting Money Laundering: constitutional analysis in favor of Attorney's Secret, Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, October 9, 2020.

Summary: By its judgment of September 24, 2020, the Constitutional Court of Belgium released an essential judgment which considers:
- Compliance Law which imposes obligations on entities to fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism is legal requirements which must be analyzed on the basis of these goals
- the national transposition law is "broader" than the transposed European texts since it is anchored in the Constitution
- the provisions of the law imposing the declaration of suspicion on an employee of the Attorney or on a Compliance Officer concerning information covered by the professional secrecy of the Attorney, the basis of Democracy, must therefore be canceled.
This reasoning is remarkable and very solid.
It is not unique to Belgium.

Lire par abonnement gratuit les autres News dans la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Judge between Platform and Regulator: current example of Uber case in U.K., Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 29th of September 2020

Read by freely subscribing the other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Summary of the news:

On 22nd of September 2017, Transport of London (TFL), London Transport Regulator, refused to renew the licence, granted on 31st of May 2012 for 5 years, authorizing Uber to transport people because of criminal offenses committed by Uber's drivers. On 26th of June 2018, The Westminster Court prolonged Uber's licence for 15 months under the condition that the platform prevent the reproachable behaviors of its drivers. After these 15 months, the TFL refused once again to prolonge Uber's licence because of the persistence of aggressions against passengers. Uber, once again, contest this decision before the Westminster Court. 

In a decision of 28th of September 2020, the Court observes that during the 15 months, the platform implemented many measures to prevent aggressions, that the level of maturity of these measures has improved over time and that the number of offenses was reduced over the period (passing from 55 in 2018 to 4 in 2020). The Court estimated the the implementation of this actions is sufficient to grant a new licence to Uber. 

We can learn three lessons from this decision: 

1. The Compliance obligation is not a result obligation but a mean obligation, which means that it is not reasonable to expect from a crucial operator (Uber, for instance) that it prevent every cases of agression but that it is salient to judge it on the effort it deploys to try to be closer to this ideal situation. Moreover, the crucial operator must be proactive, that is going away from the figure of passive subject of Law who apply measures enacted by the regulator in terms of fighting against aggressions to be an actor of the research of the best way to fight abusive behaviors, internalizing this "monumental goal. 
2. The judge appreciates the violation committed by those whose the firm is responsible "in context", that is evaluates the concrete situation in a reasonable way. 
3. It is the judge who decides in last resort and like the crucial operator, it must be reasonable. 

Read to go further:

• Frison-Roche, M.-A., Firm, Regulator and Judge: thinking Compliance through these three characters, 2018
• The report of the Assemblée nationale (French Parliament chamber) on the question 

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., The Economic Impact of Law: a new report about it. And what about Regulation & Compliance? 3 lessons, Newsletter MAFR - Law, Regulation, Compliance, 24th of September 2020

Read by freely subscribing the other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Regulation, Compliance

Summary of the news: 

On 18th of September 2020, the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) published a report about the impact of Rule of Law on Economic Growth. 

The EESC defines the Rule of Law as the obligation to "all public powers act within the constraints laid down by law, in accordance with the values of democracy and fundamental rights, and under the control of independent and impartial courts". According to the Committee, the Rule of Law thus defined is favorable and even necessary to a durable economic growth especially because instability of regulations, absence of guarantee of labor and property rights, discrimination or non-application of contracts poorly favors or are detrimental for investments and economic agents' productive activities. The EESC observes by the way that countries which respect the Rule of Law grow more rapidly than those which do not respect it. The Committee also insists on the destructive effect of corruption which destroys public services, public action, public institutions on the long run and confidence, increasing inequalities. 

Although EESC approves the actions of European Commission to advance Rule of Law in the Union, it however invites the Commission to continue its efforts by giving a more important place to jurisdictions and by protecting better media freedom in a context of rising autocratic forces in Eastern Europe. 

We can learn three lessons from this report:

1. The common interest of European Union States to guarantee the Rule of Law. Indeed, Rule of Law is not only written in article 2 of TFEU and has been consecrated by CJEU case law, it is also a condition of economic progress. 
2. The fight against corruption must be the object of a redoubled effort. In this perspective, Compliance Law is able to offer appropriate innovating legal tools.
3. To a definition of Regulation and Compliance Law as a simple process of application of mechanical legal rules, it is necessary to substitute a definition of Regulation and Compliance Law based on the notion of "monumental goals" and people protection. In this perspective, these branches of Law would prove to be powerful tools in the service of the advancement of the rule of law in the European space.