🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter Surplomb, par MAFR

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Cumul et articulation Droit spécial de la Compliance et Droit commun de la concurrence déloyale : l’arrêt de la CJUE du 4 octobre 2024 ND/DR", in série de vidéos Surplomb, 25 octobre 2024

____

🌐visionner sur LinkedIn cette vidéo de la série Surplomb

____

🌐visionner sur LinkedIn cette vidéo de la série Surplomb, publiée dans la Newsletter Surplomb, par MAFR

____

🎬visionner ci-dessous cette vidéo de la série Surplomb⤵️

____

Surplomp, par mafr

la série de vidéos dédiée à la Régulation, la Compliance et la Vigilance

► Référence complète : CJUE, Grande chambre, 4 octobre 2024, aff. C-21/23, ND c/ DR

____

🏛️lire l'arrêt

________

► Référence complète : U. Öberg, "A ‘General’ Court in Name Only", Concurrences, septembre 2024, n° 3, art. n°119581, pp. 2-6

____

► Résumé de l'article : 

____

🦉Cet article est accessible en texte intégral pour les personnes inscrites aux enseignements de la Professeure Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

________

► Référence complète : E. Netter, "Quand la force de conviction du scoring bancaire provoque sa chute. L'interprétation extensive, par la CJUE, de la prohibition des décisions entièrement automatisées", RTD com., 2024, chron., pp.342-348

____

🦉Cet article est accessible en texte intégral pour les personnes inscrites aux enseignements de la Professeure Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

________

► Référence complète : Th. Douville, "De l'approche extensive de la prise de décision exclusivement automatisée (à propos du refus d'un prêt fondé sur une note de solvabilité communiquée par un tiers)", D. 2024, pp. 1000-1004

____

🦉Cet article est accessible en texte intégral pour les personnes inscrites aux enseignements de la Professeure Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

________

► Référence complète : L. Pailler, "Haro de la Cour de justice sur les services d'aide à la décision !", Dalloz actualité, 12 décembre 2023

____

► Résumé de l'article (fait par l'auteur) : "L'établissement automatisé, par une société fournissant des informations commerciales, d'une valeur de probabilité fondée sur des données à caractère personnel relatives à une personne et concernant la capacité de celle-ci à honorer des engagements de paiement à l'avenir constitue une « décision individuelle automatisée », au sens de l'article 22, § 1er, du règlement général sur la protection des données (RGPD), lorsque dépend de manière déterminante de cette valeur de probabilité le fait qu'une tierce partie, à laquelle ladite valeur de probabilité est communiquée, établisse, exécute ou mette fin à une relation contractuelle avec cette personne.".

____

🦉Cet article est accessible en texte intégral pour les personnes inscrites aux enseignements de la Professeure Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

________

► Full Reference: ECJ, First chamber, 7 December 2023, case C‑634/21, Schufa Holding AG

____

🏛️read the judgement

____

________

► Full Reference: CJUE, 1st Chamber, 22 June 2023, C-579/21, Pankki S.

____

🏛️read the judgment

________

Full reference: CJEU, Grand chamber, Judgment Facebook Ireland e.a. v. Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit, C-645-19, June 15, 2021

Read the judgment

Read the abstract of the judgment done by the Court

Read the press release

Full reference: CJEU, 2nd of February 2021, DB v. Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob), case C‑481/19

Read the decision

Read the opinion of advocate general

Summary of the decision by CJEU: 

"Natural persons who are subject to an administrative investigation for insider dealing have the right to remain silent when their answers might establish their liability for an offence that is punishable by administrative sanctions of a criminal nature, or their criminal liability". 

To go further, read:

• Frison-Roche, M.-A., Resolve the contradiction between "incentive" and "sanction" under the fire of Compliance Law, 2021
• Frison-Roche, M.-A., Rights, primary and natural Compliance tools, 2021

Full reference: CJEU, 1st chamber, 18th of November 2020, decision C‑519/19, Ryanair DAC vs DelayFix

Read the decision

Summary of the decision

This decision of the CJEU of 18th of November 2020 is about the jurisdiction clause for any dispute in air transport contracts, here those of Ryanair. This decision is especially interesting about the question to know whether the professional assignee (collection company) of a debt whose holder was a consumer may or may not avail itself of the consumer protection provisions, canceling the scope of this type of clause. 

The Court takes back the criteria and the solution already used in 2019 about a credit contract: the protection applies by the criterion of the parties to the contract and not of the parties to the disputes. Such a clause is effective only if the integrality of the contract is transferred to the professional, and not only some of the stipulations.

This Regulatory decision, through "private enforcement", incentivizes consumers to transfer their compensation claim (around 250 euros) to collection companies which, in turn, discipline airlines to stay on schedule.

Full reference: CJEU, Grand Chamber, 6th of October 2020, Privacy International c/ Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, C-623/17.

Read the judgment 

Read the summary of the judgment (in French)

Read the opinion of the Advocate General 

Read the reference for a preliminary ruling from the Investigatory Powers Tribunal - London (United Kingdom)

🌐 follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, L'apport du Droit de la Compliance dans la Gouvernance d'Internet  (The contribution of Compliance Law to the Internet Governance), Report asked by the French Government, published the 15th of July 2019, 139 p.

___

► Report Summary. Governing the Internet? Compliance Law can help.

Compliance Law is for the Policy Maker to aim for global goals that they require to be achieved by companies in a position to do so. In the digital space built on the sole principle of Liberty, the Politics must insert a second principle: the Person. The respect of this One, in balance with the Freedom, can be required by the Policy Maker via Compliance Law, which internalises this specific pretention in the digital companies. Liberalism and Humanism become the two pillars of Internet Governance.

The humanism of European Compliance Law then enriches US Compliance law. The crucial digital operators thus forced, like Facebook, YouTube, Google, etc., must then exercise powers only to better achieve these goals to protect persons (against hatred, inadequate exploitation of data, terrorism, violation of intellectual property, etc.). They must guarantee the rights of individuals, including intellectual property rights. To do this, they must be recognized as "second level regulators", supervised by Public Authorities.

This governance of the Internet by Compliance Law is ongoing. By the European Banking Union. By green finance. By the GDPR. We must force the line and give unity and simplicity that are still lacking, by infusing a political dimension to Compliance: the Person. The European Court of Justice has always done it. The European Commission through its DG Connect is ready.

► 📓 Read the reporte (in French)

📝 Read the Report Summary in 3 pages (in English)

📝 Read the Report Summary in 6 pages (in English)

____

►  Plan of the Report (4 chapters): an ascertainment of the digitization of the world (1), the challenge of civilization that this constitutes (2), the relations of Compliance mechanisms as it should be conceived between Europe and the United States, not to mention that the world is not limited to them, with the concrete solutions that result from this (3) and concrete practical solutions to better organize an effective digital governance, inspired by what is particularly in the banking sector, and continuing what has already been done in Europe in the digital field, which has already made it exemplary and what it must continue, France can be force of proposal by the example (4).

____

📝  Read the written presentation of the Report done by Minister Cédric O (in French).

🏛 Listen to the oral  presentation of the Report by Minister Cédric O durant the parliamentary discussion of the law against hate contente on the Internet (in French).

____

💬 Read the interview published the 18 July 2019 : "Gouvernance d'Internet : un enjeu de civilisation" ( "Governing Internet: an Issue of Civilization"), given in French, 

📻 Listen the Radio broadcast of July 21, 2019 during which its consequences are applied to the cryptocurrency "Libra" (given in French)

🏛 Presentation of the Report to the Conseil Supérieur de l'Audiovisuel- CSA (French Council of Audiovisual) on Septembre 5, by a discussion with its members presentation (in French)

💬 Read the  Interview published the 20 December 2019 : "Le droit de la compliance pour réguler l'Internet" ("Compliance Law for regulate Internet"), given in French

____

read below the 54 propositions of the Report ⤵️

Full reference: CJCE, 4th of June 2002, Decision C-483/99, Commission v/ France (Total)

Read the decision