🌐Follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐Subscribe to the video newsletter MAFR Overhang

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Law & Art

____

► Full reference : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le Droit de la Compliance, voie de la transition vers une égalité effective, efficace et efficiente entre les êtres humains (Compliance Law, for the transition towards the effectiveness, efficacy and efficiency of the equality between human beings)", in Chair "Mutualist and cooperative banking at the service of the economy", ESCP, Les banques coopératives et les transitions​ (Cooperative Banks and Transitions), 29 January 2026.

____

🧮view the general programme for the conference Cooperative banks and transitions (in French)

____

📶see the slides (in French)

____

► Presentation of this conference: The conference is not specifically aimed at lawyers, and even less so at specialists in Compliance Law. That is why it is divided into three parts, in order to show how Compliance Law is relevant in practice for creating effective, efficace and efficient equality between human beings.

The first part of the lecture sets out the ambition of equality between human beings. As this is a political principle and not a natural one. As it is an ambition, it justifies being placed first and after that this ambition must be concretised, in a sort of second place. This second place is built bay a tro : that of effectiveness (real application of the norm), efficacy (that the goal for which the norm was established is achieved) and efficiency (that the system is transformed so that, having become robust, it endures through sustainabily).

The second part of the conference will present the new branch of law known as Compliance Law. This should be distinguished from simple conformity, which consists of mechanically obeying a body of regulations that are constantly growing and becoming more complex. Compliance Law's Goal is to protect systems from risks that could cause them to disappear (all systems). "Sustainability" is the key principle, which is not limited to the climatic system (also digital system, banking system, and so on) and imposes the future as its object and the long term as its relevant time frame (unlike the market and Competition Law). "Transition" is also a key concept, as it involves moving from one state to another, from an expressed ambition to its realisation, through collaboration with others. These Goals are "Monumental" and are the normative legal basis of Compliance Law. In Europe, the Compliance Monumental Goal is to preserve systems for that the human beings who are involved in them, willingly or unwillingly, are not crushed by them, but rather benefit from them (for instance in banking sector). This is a "Monumental Negative Goal", to which is added a "Monumental Positive Goal", which a new conception of the "Ex Ante Responsability" (not liabily).

Dialectically, the third part of the conference explains how Compliance Law internalises the political ambition of equality between human beings, which develops in the three concentric circles of effectiveness, efficacy and efficiency, among the operators best placed to contribute to it.

Mutual banks belong to these circles more than the others. Firstly, because they are structured around the principle of taking human beings into consideration. Secondly, because they are rooted in their local areas. Thirdly, because they are driven by the long term, duration and sustainable. The transition est easer. The dificulty is the necessity to proof the effective and efficient will to do this transition.

____

⛏️Go further  :

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Drawing the circles of Compliance Law, 2017

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Monumental goals, the beating heart of compliance law, 2021

🕴🏻C. Peicuti and 🕴🏻J. Beyssade, 📝The feminisation of management positions in companies as a compliance objective. The example of the banking sector, in 🕴🏻M. -A. Frison-Roche, 📘The Monumental Goals of Compliance, 2022 

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Births of a New Branch of Law: Compliance Law, 2024

________

🌐Follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐Subscribe to the video newsletter MAFR Overhang

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Law & Art

____

► Full reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Asset freezing in the legal saga between American power and Venezuelan wealth", MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation Newsletter, 23 January 2026

____

🌐read this article published on LinkedIn the 23 January 2026 

____

📧Read other articles from the MAFR Newsletter - Law, Compliance, Regulation for free with a subscription.

____

► Summary of this article  : It is often emphasised that the  law is merely a masquerade in the series of events we are witnessing.

This is not entirely true.

For three reasons.

1. Much will depend on the judge who will rule on the Madura couple's case. The energy sector has always similarly mixed regulation, public policies of states and businesses, both articulated by States and companies, both articulated by  international contracts, always organising international arbitration

3. If ExxonMobil now refuses to make the investments desired by Trump, it is also because this enterprise remembers that many years ago the freeze  of assets granted by the arbitrators was not very successful, and now the company manager believes that investment in  Venezuala's infrastructure is therefore "impossible".

And given the current state of the law in the US, there is little Trump can do about it..

____

📝⤵Read the complete article below⤵

► Référence complète  : E. Pataut et S. Robin-Olivier, Les directives CSRD et CS3D et le droit social. Respecter les droits sociaux dans les chaînes de production mondiales,  Bruylant, coll. "Droit de l'Union européenne" (Colloques), 2026

____

►lire la table des matières et l'avant-propos

________

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter en vidéo MAFR Surplomb

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, «"Géomètres-experts : une profession qui s’engage dans la compliance"», interview pour Solution Notaire Hebdo, Lefebvre Dalloz, 8 janvier 2026

Interrogée par Juliette Courquin, journaliste à Solution Notaire Hebdo

___

► lire l'entretien : 💬 Lire l'interview au cours duquel les réponses ont été apportées aux questions reproduites ci-dessous⤵

____

Q. Pourriez-vous définir le droit de la compliance ?

Q. La compliance se prête-t-il à l'Ordre des géomètres-experts et à la profession elle-même ?

Q. L'OGE et la profession se sont engagés dans la compliance en définissant leur raison d'être, quelles en sont les conséquences juridiques ? 

Q. Un dernier mot sur l'Ordre des géomètres-experts et la profession avec qui vous avez travaillé sur la compliance ?

_________

⛏️Aller plus loin sur la question :

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🎤Concevoir une raison d'être et l'expliciter, 2025

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Les buts monumentaux de la compliance, coeur battant du droit de la compliance, 2023

________

🌐Follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐Subscribe to the video newsletter MAFR Overhang

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Law & Art

____

► Full reference : M.-A. Frison-Roche, Saisir les principes du Droit de la Compliance à travers l'actualité (Understanding the principles of compliance law through current current legal cases and events), Jean Moulin  - Lyon 3 University Law Faculty, 10 December 2025.

____

► Methodological presentation of this 4-hour MasterClass : It is difficult to teach a branch of law that is still being developed, to find a way to open its doors, because if by explaining its principles ex abrupto, the risk exists of remaining at the door, even though the aim is to open it. This door is all the more blocked by the accumulation of multiple regulatory corpus, which are now perceived as being linked to Compliance Law: GDPR, Sapin 2, Vigilance, Nis2, Dora, FCPA, etc.; These are highly technical and complicated, and tend to be studied in silos, with little connection between them and little articulation with the traditional branches of Law. Therefore, the principles that form the backbone of Compliance Law as an autonomous branch of Law are all the less apparent, even though they would make these "compliance blocks" more intelligible and manageable. However, setting out these principles, which shed light not only on the current positive law but also on how it will evolve, seems "theoretical".

In order to open the door to this new branch of Law, which already occupies a significant place in practice and is set to expand, so that it can be handled by lawyers who understand its spirit and is not entirely dominated by those from other disciplines who will master its tools (risk mapping, assessment, internal investigation, etc.), most often through algorithms and platforms (compliance by design), it is relevant to start with a few cases, a few decisions, a few texts, and a few comments, to gauge what they reveal.

Because the principles are already there. They are gradually emerging. The challenge is that they often emerge quickly, in a manner that is sufficiently consistent with other branches of Law, and that the legal aspect takes precedence. That is what is at stake today.

Each hour is devoted to a different case, based on a document of a different legal genre.

____

🌐read a post on LinkedIn (in French)

____

____

⛏️Find out more  :

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Compliance Law, 2016

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Monumental Goals, the beating heart of Compliance Law, 2023

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝In Compliance Law, the legal consequences for Entreprises of their commitments and undertakings, 2025

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Compliance Law and Systemic Litigation, 2025

________

🌐Follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐Subscribe to the video newsletter MAFR Overhang

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Law & Art

____

► Full reference : M.-A. Frison-Roche, ""Géomètres-experts : une profession qui assume concrètement sa responsabilité territoriale Géomètres-experts : une profession qui assume concrètement sa responsabilité territoriale (Chartered Surveyors: a Profession that takes its territorial responsibility seriously)", interview for JurisHebdo, 27 November 2025

___

► Read the interview  (in French) in which the questions (translated below in English) were answered⤵

____

Q.You helped define the raison d'être of the profession of chartered surveyors and its Professional Order. In your opinion, what is its true consequences?

Q. Can the raison d'être become a tool for Compliance or Governance?

Q. What conflicts arise around the source of compliance norms and their implementation? 

Q. Is this initiative part of a broader move towards social responsibility?

Q. How can the raison d'être influence the mission of the chartered surveyor, particularly in relation to land and environmental matters? 

_________

⛏️Further reading on the subject:

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🎤Designing a raison d'être and explaining it, 2025

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝The Monumental Goals of Compliance, the beating heart of Compliance Law, 2023

________

► Référence complète : V. Monteillet, "Le contrat, outil de mise en oeuvre des obligations de vigilance entre partenaires de la chaine de valeur", in M. Boutonnet, B. Parance et J. Rochfeld (dir.), Engagements et contrats à l'aune des mutations environnementales, Lefebvre-Dalloz, coll. "Thèmes et commentaires, 2025, pp.15-24.

_____

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

________

► Référence complète : Y. Kerbrat, "L’avis consultatif de la Cour internationale de justice du 23 juillet 2025 sur les obligations des États en matière de changement climatique", Clunet, 2025, n°4, 

________

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

🌐Follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐Subscribe to the video newsletter MAFR Overhang

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Law & Art

____

► Full reference : M.-A. Frison-Roche,  ""Ordonner la Compliance : pourquoi le faire et comment le faire ? (Organising Compliance: why do it and how to do it?)", interview Focus on... conducted for Dalloz Actu Étudiants, 13 November 2025

___

► read the interview : 💬 Read the interview (in French)

____

🌐read the interview presentation on LinkedIn (in French)

🌐read the interview presentation through the MAFR Newsletter Law, Compliance, Regulation, (in English)

____

► presentation  of the interview by Dalloz Actu-Étudiants  : Compliance can be defined as a new branch of law that mobilises major economic players and their stakeholders to ensure that the large systems in which we live do not collapse, but remain solid and sustainable. Sanctions, contracts, ethical principles, court decisions and corporate cultures all converge to achieve this. The ambition is great, some contest it, many want to escape it. It is still difficult to define compliance, which seems to be going in all directions. Who? What? Why? How?

These are all questions addressed by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, professor of law and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC), together with the contributors to the collective works in the Régulations & Compliance series under her scientific direction. Compliance (JoRC), together with the contributors to the collective works in the "Regulations & Compliance" collection under her scientific direction, sheds light on with her imaginative power combined with her legal precision.

____

Q.Why do the fundamental objectives of compliance unify all legal compliance techniques?

Summary of MAFR's response: because all these regulatory frameworks, which large companies are required to enforce effectively and which appear disparate, creating as many specific requirements as there are regulatory compliance blocks, find their unity when we consider the following reality: whatever the body of regulations in question (Sapin 2, Vigilance, Nis2, Dora, IAA, etc.), the aim is always to identify and prevent systemic risks so that these systems do not collapse.

Q. How can we define the obligation of compliance?

Summary of MAFR response: the company concerned is therefore obliged to put in place "compliance structures", such as mapping, plans, alert structures and programmes (obligation of result), but of course, and this is the key point, to achieve this goal, namely to ensure that the system in question (banking, financial, climate, digital, algorithmic, etc.) does not collapse. This is an obligation of means. This is the exact, simple definition that unifies all the regulations of the Compliance Obligation for which subject companies are responsible.

Q. What conflicts arise around the source of compliance standards and their implementation? 

Summary of MAFR's response: It must remain a matter of law. However, many argue that because it is only a matter of "compliance" and "ticking all the boxes", algorithms (which do not think or know anything) will do this, eliminating the need for lawyers and the law. This must be avoided. Furthermore, given the immense ambition of safeguarding systems, political and public authorities, businesses and stakeholders must join forces. They must not fight to bring each other down.

Q. What are the complexities of compliance law? 

Summary of MAFR's response: I would not say "complexity", because although the regulations are complicated, compliance law is fairly simple and unified around its monumental goals of safeguarding systems, ensuring their future sustainability and protecting the people involved in them. However, it is a new branch of law that is still poorly understood and therefore sometimes poorly mastered. It therefore needs to be organised.

Q. What is your proposal for ordering it? 

Summary of MAFR's response: Teaching more about compliance law will facilitate its organisation. The courts, to which all regulations converge through litigation, will participate in this organisation, which is necessary to ensure that regulations do not remain in silos and do not contradict each other when they have the same purpose, which constitutes their legal normativity. This new branch of law must also be articulated with all other branches of law. This is notably what the recently published book, L'obligation de compliance (The Obligation of Compliance), does.

_________

🌐Follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐Subscribe to the video newsletter MAFR Overhang

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Law & Art

____

► Full reference : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Concevoir une Raison d'être et l'explicitre (Conceiving a Raison d'être and explaining it)", speech at the round table discussion "Dire sa Raison d'être (Expressing your Raison d'être)", National Conference of the Géomètres Expert (French Chartered Surveyors), 6 November 2025, Paris.

____

► Presentation of the Round Table : This round table opens two days of work bringing together all the leaders, members of the Council of the Order of Chartered Surveyors and Regional Councils of Chartered Surveyors, in the presence of the relevant Ministry, in specific sessions during which the two Raison d'être that have been developed over several years of work and adopted, the Raison d'être of the profession and the Raison d'être of the Order, are presented.

🪑🪑🪑Other participants in the round table discussion, moderated by Hervé Grélard, General Deputy of the French Order of Chartered Surveyors:

🕴🏻Thomas Bonnel, chartered surveyor

🕴🏻Luc Lanoy, chartered surveyor,

🕴🏻Séverine Vernet, Chairwoman of the French Order of Chartered Surveyors

____

► Summary of my presentation : Firstly, I spoke to remind everyone what a "raison d'être" is, in itself, and why it is particularly important when the entity that embodies it also constitutes a "profession", the raison d'être expressing this hybrid nature that is destined to endure in today's societies. It moves those who uphold the raison d'être – the professional, the profession, the umbrella organisation that is the Order – from the past to the future. To effectively carry this raison d'être, its bearer cannot remain isolated. Unlike the agent who operates in a market and whose strategy is solitary dynamism against others, the bearer of the raison d'être must find allies who share similar or compatible ideas and develop points of contact to carry out a collective project (the "Monumental Goals"). This is why it is just as important to communicate, explain and share the raison d'être with the outside world.

Secondly, as the discussion surrounding the statement of purpose of the French Order of Surveyors and the profession progressed, I was led to point out that the raison d'être is not, or not only, ethical in nature, but also legal in nature, constituting at the very least a legal fact that can become enforceable against those who recognise themselves in it and claim it. This kind of reward, which is the "ex ante responsibility" expressed by the raison d'être and relayed by Compliance Law, anchored in its monumental goals of sustainability and responsibility, justifies that the profession that embraces its raison d'être is not simply an efficient profession in a supply and demand market, but establishes the Order as a regulator. This places both in the long term.

________

⛏️Further reading on the subject: (with English Summaries)

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 💬"Géomètres-experts : une profession qui assume concrètement sa responsabilité territoriale", 2025

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝A quoi engagent les engagements, 2025

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche et 🕴🏻S. Vernet, 📝La profession investit le Droit de la compliance et détermine sa Raison d'être, 2023

🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📧Quels sont les points de contact entre la Raison d'être des entreprises et le Droit de la Compliance ?, 2022

________

►Full Reference: M.A. Frison-Roche, "Droit de la compliance et Contentieux systémique" (Compliance Law and Systemic Litigation), in Chroniques Droit de la Compliance (Compliance Law Chronicles), Recueil Dalloz, 6 November 2025 

____

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

____ 

►read the English presentation of the previous chronicles:

• "Compliance and conformity: Distinguish them in order to articulate them", 2024
• "Regulations, Compliance, Contracts, and Judges: places and alliances", 2023
• "Contract of compliance, stipulations fo compliance", 2022
• "The Adventure of the Compliance", 2020
• "Compliance and Legal Personality", 2019
• "TLegal Theory of Risk Mapping", 2019

►read the English presentation of the whole chroniques

____

►English summary of this article: Legal systems have changed, and Compliance Law, in its uniqueness, reflects this change and plays a powerful role in it. Through new sets of compliance rules, particularly at European level, in areas such as data protection (GDPR), anti-money laundering (AMLA), climate balance protection (CS3D) and banking and financial system sustainability (Banking Union), techniques (always the same) have been developed and imposed on large companies, which must implement them: alerts, mapping, assessment, sanctions, etc. These new regulatory frameworks only make sense in relation to their ‘Monumental Goals’: to detect systemic risks Ex Ante and prevent crises so that the systems in question do not collapse, but ‘sustain". All the legal instruments in the corpus are normatively rooted in these Monumental Goals, which are the core that unifies Compliance Law (I).

Judges are the guardians (II) of this new and highly ambiguous normative framework, which relies on the practical ability of companies to do just that. They ensure that the technical provisions are applied teleologically in each of these compliance blocks, and that the regulatory frameworks are mutually supportive, for it is always the same systemic goal that all compliance regulations serve: to ensure that systems (banking, financial, climate, digital, energy, etc.) do not collapse, that they are sustainable, and that present and future human beings are not crushed by them but, on the contrary, benefit from them. This unity is still little perceived, as regulations pulverize this profound unity of compliance law in the myriad of changing provisions. Entrusting the "regulatory mass" to algorithms increases this pulverization, making the whole increasingly incomprehensible and therefore impossible to handle.  Acknowledging the judge's rightful place, i.e. at the heart of the matter, will enable us to master this new branch of law. But it's not the judge's job alone to restore clarity to a whole covered in the dust of his own technicality.

The systemic object of Compliance Law is transferred to Litigation. Indeed, the Litigation that emerges from the new Compliance Law is also fundamentally new, by transitivity. Indeed, the aim of Compliance Law is to make systems sustainable (or sustainable, or resilient, the vocabulary varies). The result is litigation which is itself "systemic litigation" (III), most often initiated by an organization against a systemic operator. The place and role of each are transformed (IV).

________

🌐Follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐Subscribe to the video newsletter MAFR Overhang

🌐Subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Law & Art

____

► Full reference : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "De l'obligation de compliance à l'obligation de vigilance : le rôle du juge (From the obligation of compliance to the obligation of vigilance: the role of the judge)", in Round table De la compliance au devoir de vigilance. Une nouvelle responsabilité des entreprises (From Compliance to the Vigilance duty. A new responsibility for businesses," Lettre des juristes d'affaires, Oct. 2025.

____

📝read the article reproducing the entire discussion (in French)

____

► Summary of my contribution:  In this debate, the terms of which have been reproduced in the journal, I was asked to explain how the legal system had evolved, first by establishing Compliance Law, built on systemic ambitions to prevent sectoral disasters (banking, finance, energy), ambitions that constitute "Monumental Negative Goals", and then evolving on the one hand "Monumental Positive Goals", namely the protection of human beings involved willingly or unwillingly in these systems, on the other hand, outside even sectors with clearly defined boundaries, such as environmental or digital ambitions. The duty of vigilance extends this regulatory law and gives concrete form to the "compliance obligation" to which companies are subject. It is important to maintain a sense of proportion in the conception of the responsibility attached to it so as not to lose everything. Companies are bound by the goals but must remain free in their choice of means, and in particular be encouraged to use contractual techniques. This measure is entrusted to the judge because, due to the Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, it is at the heart of this new branch of Law, which is developing independently of fluctuations in the regulations.

During the discussion, I was asked for my opinion on the ruling handed down by the Paris Court of Appeal on 17 June 2025, known as La Poste case. I pointed out that the comments had often focused only on the developments regarding risk mapping, whereas this ruling first establishes the principle that the vigilance plan is the work of the company's decision-making bodies and is not co-constructed, as consultation is a process of discussion and taking in consideration, which is not the same thing, with the judge himself pointing out that they must not interfere in management.

In the discussion, I emphasised that if we were to highlight the essence of what would be a "new responsibility", it would primarily concern a new probative dimension that the company must implement in Ex Ante. The implementation of the CSRD, even if it has been excessively standardised, is in line with this, and this probative culture must be developed.

____

⛏️Further reading on the subject :

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Obligation, 2026

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Vigilance, the front line and integral part of the compliance obligation, 2025

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Compliance, Vigilance and Civil Liability: put in Order and keep the sense of Reason, 2025

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, 2024

________

____

____

► Article summary : The 

________

► Full Reference: Y. Feldman,Can the Public Be Trusted?: On the Promise and Perils of Voluntary Compliance, Cambridge University Press, 2025. 

____

► Presentation of the book (done by the Author) : "When do citizens voluntarily comply with regulations rather than act out of fear of sanctions? Can the Public Be Trusted? challenges prevailing regulatory paradigms by examining when democratic states can rely on voluntary compliance. Drawing on behavioral science, law, and public policy research, Yuval Feldman explores why voluntary compliance, despite often yielding superior and more sustainable outcomes, remains underutilized by policymakers. Through empirical analysis of policy implementation in COVID-19 response, tax compliance, and environmental regulation, Feldman examines trust-based governance’s potential and limitations. The book presents a comprehensive framework for understanding how cultural diversity, technological change, and institutional  shape voluntary cooperation.".

____

📗Read the book

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the VideoNews  MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Law & Art

____

► Full reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Adéquation et inadéquation de la sanction comme outil de régulation financière et sa transformation par la Compliance" (Adequacy and inadequacy of sanctions as a tool of Financial Regulation and its transformation through Compliance)", contribution to the round-table discussion on"Quel rôle pour la sanction dans la régulation ? (What role for sanctions in Regulatory System)", Annual conference of the Commission des sanctions (Enforcement Committee) of the Autorité des marchés financiers - AMF (French Financial Markets Authority), Paris,  14 October 2025.

____

► see the general programme of this manifestation (in French)

The event comprises two round tables. The theme of the first round table is: La preuve des abus de marché entre l’AMF et le juge pénal : vers une convergence ? (Proof of market abuse between the AMF and the criminal courts: towards convergence?)

🪑🪑🪑AutresOther participants in this 2nd round table, moderated by Sophie Schiller, member of the Enforcement Committe on the topic: Quel rôle pour la sanction dans la régulation ? (What role for sanctions in Regulatory System?)

🕴🏻Sébastien Raspiller, Secretary General of the AMF

🕴🏻Martine Samuelian, Partner, Jeantet Law Firm

🕴🏻Vincent Villette, Secretary General of the CNIL (French Personal Data Regulatory Body)

____

► Summary of this intervention : In the round-table discussion on the role of sanctions, a number of contributions will be made, depending on the nature of the discussion itself. They will be brief in nature and will be aimed at an audience with a good knowledge of financial regulation.

It is the occasion for me to insist on 2 things, the first naturely and probably for ever attached to the role of sanctions in all Regulatory Systems, the secund very new. The first is the indissociability between Criminal Law and Sanction, even if sanctions is defined as a regulatory tools. The secund is the conception and the use of sanctions through Compliance Law.

Therefore, in the first idea, my first intervention, aimed more at establishing the subject and describing the Intangible, is on the very idea that sanctions have a role to play in financial regulation. By its very nature. But this does not make it any less difficult. It is not obvious, because if penalties are seen as a 'regulatory tool', then it is the regulatory perspective that predominates and 'colours' the tool that is the penalty. Regulation, of which the texts on the basis which sanctions are issued are only one tool and which is not the set of applicable rules, Regulation which is an apparatus of institutions, rules and decisions aimed at establishing the equilibrium of a sector and maintaining this equilibrium, which is by nature unstable, over time, which the sector could not do by its own efforts alone (Regulatory Law, which is Ex Ante Law, thus distinguishing itself from Competition Law, which is Ex Post Law).

From the perspective of Financial Regulatory System, as in other sectoral regulatory systems, and in the general Regulatory Law, sanctions are a tool (and a tool like any other, simply more powerful than the others.

This is the pragmatic perspective adopted by the State and the Regulatory body itself, which will use it in conjunction with other tools, such as an Information, Education and Incentive mechanism. Moreover, it shall use sanction as informative tool, as educational tool, as incentive tool.

However, the principle of the autonomy of Criminal Law, and the European concept of "Criminal Matters" mean that the sanction can be seen in terms of the autonomous criteria of the seriousness of the act imputed and the sanction imposed on the legal person. In this respect, the penalty is inseparable from the way in which it is imposed (Criminal Law is constitutionally inseparable from Criminal Procedure).

In this respect, the sanction is not a tool coloured by the overall objective served by the Financial Markets Regulatory Body: the sustainability of the financial system. The Enforcement Committee is not the AMF's "armed wing"; it is a "court", as the Oury ruling reminded us.

Therefore, the question is and I would like to ask it directly to the Enforcement Committed: Can you be both?

  As they say, could you be both carp and rabbit? Depending on whether you are viewed from one angle or another, you will be seen as the body that makes financial markets effective (a tool among the tools) or as the body that punishes misconduct (a court among the courts).

It is possible, and in practice it is often true.

But if we are honest, we will admit that regulation feeds on information and that the procedure before a criminal court is built on secrecy and the weapons of those who, innocent or guilty, are at risk because they are, or will be, prosecuted.

We've never got out of this difficulty. We always try to strike a balance between the fact that it is in itself a repressive sanction for a person who will suffer and the fact that it is also a systemic tool: there is a 'balance' between the search for systemic benefit (which reduces the protection of individuals for the benefit of the system) and the concern for the people involved (which reduces the present and future protection of the system). The balance goes more or less in one direction. It is often public opinion, the place, the legislator and, even above all,  the civil appeal judge (vertical dialogue) and those in dialogue, between the regulator and the criminal judge (horizontal dialogue) which cause the scales of diverse technical solutions.

It is also the way in which the Enforcement Committee, in defining itself as the armed wing of the AMF (carp) or as a repressive court (rabbit), chooses in its procedural behaviour the role of sanctions in Financial Regulatory System, more or less instrumentalised (carp) or jurisdictionalised (rabbit).

____

The second point, if there is to be one, concerns the development of the role of sanctions in Financial Regulatory System .

On the basis of these fundamentals, an evolution in the role of sanctions in financial regulatory system (an evolution that can be observed in all sectoral regulatory systems) consists of internalising sanctions (in their conception by the texts, their elaboration by the Sanctions Committees, their application) in the economic operators sanctioned, in the economic sectors concerned, in the opinion concerned (the figure of Peelmanian circles of the audiences applying).

This internalisation transforms Regulatory mission of the administrative body (which deals with market structures) into Rupervision (which deals directly with market operators) since the sanction penetrates the operator, the operator adopting commitments. This concept corresponds to the new branch of Law known as Compliance Law. 

Compliance Law uses sanctions as an "incentive like any other", and (we must be careful on this point), because it is systemic in nature, the concern for the system being internalised in the operator, it is relatively insensitive to procedural rights. With the emphasis on information, it is the principle of adversarial debate (which provides information) rather than the rights of the defence that is valued. The cooperation of the person being prosecuted is highly valued, and non-cooperation becomes incomprehensible.

The internalisation of sanctions by operators has led to two major changes. Firstly, these economic operators themselves must sanction, detect and prevent market abuse. The number of special obligations of vigilance is increasing. The obligation of vigilance of operators themselves is becoming a pillar of Regulation, transformed in Supervision.

 The other development is the liberalisation of regulatory system in relation to territory, thank to Compliance Law. As operators are less dependent on borders than are regulators and authors of legal texts (but soft law is spreading, including repression), market abuses can be apprehended in several jurisdictions at the same time, notably through global compliance programmes.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "La volonté, le cœur et le calcul, les trois traits cernant l'Obligation de Compliance" ("Will, Heart and Calculation, the three marks surrounding the Compliance Obligation"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance" 2025, pp.49-65.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on the basis this contribution has been built, with  more developments, technical references and hyperlinks. 

____

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

📚see the general presentation of the series "Régulations & Compliance" in which this book is published

____

► English summary of this contribution : There is often a dispute over the pertinent definition of Compliance Law, but the scale and force of the resulting obligation for the companies subject to it is clear.  It remains difficult to define. First, we must not to be overwhelmed by the many obligations through which the Compliance Obligation takes shape, such as the obligation to map, to investigate, to be vigilant, to sanction, to educate, to collaborate, and so on. Not only this obligations list is very long, it is also open-ended, with companies themselves and judges adding to it as and when companies, sectors and cases require. 

Nor should we be led astray by the distance that can be drawn between the contours of this Compliance Obligation, which can be as much a matter of will, a generous feeling for a close or distant other in space or time, or the result of a calculation. This plurality does not pose a problem if we do not concentrate all our efforts on distinguishing these secondary obligations from one another but on measuring what they are the implementation of, this Compliance Obligation which ensures that entities, companies, stakeholders and public authorities, contribute to achieving the Goals targeted by Compliance Law, Monumental Goals which give unity to the Compliance Obligation.  Thus unified by the same spirit, the implementation of all these secondary obligations, which seem at once disparate, innumerable and often mechanical, find unity in their regime and the way in which Regulators and Judges must control, sanction and extend them, since the Compliance Obligation breathes a common spirit into them.

 In the same way that the multiplicity of compliance techniques must not mask the uniqueness of the Compliance Obligation, the multiplicity of sources must not produce a similar screen. Indeed, the Legislator has often issued a prescription, an order with which companies must comply, Compliance then often being perceived as required obedience. But the company itself expresses a will that is autonomous from that of the Legislator, the vocabulary of self-regulation and/or ethics being used in this perspective, because it affirms that it devotes forces to taking into consideration the situation of others when it would not be compelled to do so, but that it does so nonetheless because it cares about them. However, the management of reputational risks and the value of bonds of trust, or a suspicious reading of managerial choices, lead us to say that all this is merely a calculation.

Thus, the contribution sets out to identify the Compliance Obligation by recognising the role of all these different sources. It emphasises that, in monitoring the proper performance of technical compliance obligations by Managers, Regulators and Judges, insofar as they implement the Compliance Obligation, it is pointless to limit oneself to a single source or to rank them abruptly in order of importance. The Compliance Obligation is part of the very definition of Compliance Law, built on the political ambition to achieve these Monumental Goals of preserving systems - banking, financial, energy, digital, etc. - in the future, so that human beings who cannot but depend on them are not crushed by them, or even benefit from them. This is the teleological yardstick by which the Compliance Obligation is measured, and with it all the secondary obligations that give it concrete form, whatever their source and whatever the reason why the initial standard was adopted.

In order to define Compliance's Obligation, the study endeavours to recognise the contribution of all these three sources: Will, Heart and Calculation.

________

► Full reference : Th. Goujon-Bethan, "Les enjeux présents à venir de l’articulation des principes de procédure civile et commerciale avec la logique de compliance (Current and future challenges for articulating civil and commercial procedural principles with Compliance Logic)", in  M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.693-719.

____

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

____

► Summary of this article (by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC): The author shows that the French Code of Civil Procedure, because it is exceptionally well designed and managed, can respond to the scale of transformation brought about by Compliance Law.

Compliance Law is normatively anchored in its Monumental Goals: these are brought as such before the judge in 'Systemic Cases'.

However, the French Code of Civil Procedure distinguishes between litigation and conflict, as demonstrated by the work of the academic authors of the Code, who were very famous legal scholars. Indeed, in a "Systemic Case" such as Compliance Law, which necessarily takes precedence (climate, protection of internet users, effective equality of human beings, sustainability of banking systems, etc.), it is the parties who are in dispute, while the conflict encompasses the systems themselves and other entities.
The procedure must incorporate not only the dispute but also the conflict. This means, in particular, that we must deal not only with the dispute, but also with the conflict, which does not necessarily end with the dispute and does not find the same solutions as those sought by the dispute. It is particularly in this latter perspective, essentially in a "Systemic Compliance Case" procedure, that the techniques of mediation, amicus curiae, with a judge who takes an ex ante position, etc., are required. They are available through legal dispositions of this French Code of Civil Procedure: judges who understand what "Systemic Compliance Cases" are need only apply them.

____

🦉this  article is available in full text for people who follow the professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's teaching 

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le droit processuel, prototype de l'Obligation de Compliance " ("General Procedural Law, prototype of Compliance Obligation"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance" 2025, pp. 209-233.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on the basis this contribution has been built, with  more developments, technical references and hyperlinks. 

____

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

____

► English summary of this contribution : At first glance, General Procedural Law seems to be the area the least concerned by the Compliance Obligation, because if the person is obliged by it, mainly large companies, it is precisely, thanks to this Ex Ante, in order to never to have to deal with proceedings, these path that leads to the Judge, that Ex Post figure that in return for the weight of the compliance obligation they have been promised they will never see: any prospect of proceedings would be seeming to signify the very failure of the Compliance Obligation (I).

But not only are the legal rules attached to the Procedure necessary because the Judge is involved, and increasingly so, in compliance mechanisms, but they are also rules of General Procedural Law and not a juxtaposition of civil procedure, criminal procedure, administrative procedure, etc., because the Compliance Obligation itself is not confined either to civil procedure or to criminal procedure, to administrative procedure, etc., which in practice gives primacy to what brings them all together: General Procedural Law (II).

In addition to what might be called the "negative" presence of General Procedural Law, there is also a positive reason, because General Procedural Law is the prototype for "Systemic Compliance Litigation", and in particular for the most advanced aspect of this, namely the duty of vigilance (III). In particular, it governs the actions that can be brought before the Courts (IV), and the principles around which proceedings are conducted, with an increased opposition between the adversarial principle, which marries the Compliance Obligation, since both reflect the principle of Information, and the rights of the defence, which do not necessarily serve them, a clash that will pose a procedural difficulty in principle (V).

Finally, and this "prototype" status is even more justified, because Compliance Law has given companies jurisdiction over the way in which they implement their legal Compliance Obligations, it is by respecting and relying on the principles of General Procedural Law that this must be done, in particular through not only sanctions but also internal investigations (VI).

________

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter en vidéo MAFR Surplomb

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, Audition par le collège thématique "RSE" de l'Observatoire des litiges judiciaires de la Cour de cassation, " Points de contact entre le Droit de la Compliance et la RSE", Cour de cassation, 2 octobre 2025.

____

► Résumé de la présentation : La présentation dure une demie-heure. Elle est construite en deux temps, tout d'abord une présentation générale sur les "points de contact entre Droit de la compliance et RSE", en ce qu'ils dépendent de la conception que l'on a en pratique du Droit de la compliance, puis, dans la mesure où cette perspective intéresse plus particulièrement le collège thématique, un approfondissement sur les conséquences processuelles qu'il convient d'en tirer.

PREALABLE. DISTINGUER NETTEMENT LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE DE LA RSE, SEULE VOIE POUR LES ARTICULER

1. ne pas confondre la morale, source d'inspiration du Droit, et le Droit. 

Le Droit a des sources multiples, économiques, sociales, morales et religieuses. Les impératifs moraux inspirent le Droit, guident ceux qui adoptent des règles juridiques, guident les comportements. Mais ce sont deux ordres différents. Kelsen a construit sa "théorie pure" du Droit pour protéger le système juridique afin qu'il ne soit qu'inspiré par des valeurs qui sont dans une Norme fondamentale hors du système juridique. Ce que l'on appelle RSE est une norme qui inspire de nombreux blocs de compliance, par exemple Sapin 2, la loi Vigilance, la CSRD, la CS3D, etc. mais, de la même façon que la responsabilité juridique ne transforme pas le Deutéronome en Droit, ces textes ne transforment pas la RSE en Droit. Le Droit demeure autonome, n'est pas l'agent d'efficacité de l'éthique, qui trouverait enfin la puissance du Droit à son service.

De la même façon que le Droit économique n'est pas la façon dont des "lois économiques" trouvent une plus grande efficacité. Cela serait une erreur de pénétration entre deux ordres, et une vassalisation pour le Droit qui deviendrait l'agent d'effectivité d'une norme qui lui est hétéronome. Les économistes ne veulent pourtant au bénéfice de ce qui serait la loi économique. Carl Schmitt le voulait au bénéfice de ce qui serait la loi politique. Il est impératif dans un Etat de Droit que le Droit garde son autonomie par rapport à l'économie, à la politique et à l'éthique (ESG, RSE).

2. la loi peut, pour des motifs moraux, imposer à l'entreprise des obligations juridiques légales

Le Droit l'a toujours fait.

3. la responsabilité morale et la responsabilité juridique sont distinctes : la première n'entraîne pas ipso facto la seconde

4 l'entreprise peut par sa volonté s'imposer des obligations qui expriment des choix moraux, dès l'instant qu'ils ne contredisent pas la loi : elle juridicise sa responsabilité morale, les deux obligations se superposant

🔴mafr, 📝"Obligation sur obligation vaut", 2025

I. CE QU'EST EN PRATIQUE LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE, BATI SUR L'OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE A LAQUELLE L'ENTREPRISE EST ASSUJETTIE 

1. définition faible et définition forte de la compliance : ne pas réduire le Droit à une peau de chagrin, aider par sa "juridictionnalisation" à ce que la branche naissante du Droit de la compliance grandisse dans sa conception européenne

🔴 mafr  (dir.),📕  Pour une Europe de la Compliance, 2019

🔴 mafr  (dir.),📕  Les buts monumentaux de la compliance, 2022

🔴 mafr  (dir.),📕  L'obligation de compliance , 2025

2. le rôle central du juge dans le droit européen de la compliance, en construction

🔴 mafr  (dir.),📕  La juridictionnalisation de la compliance , 2024

3. l'obligation de vigilance, pointe avancée de l'obligation de compliance, 

🔴mafr, 📝La vigilance, pointe avancée et part totale de l'obligation de compliance, 2025

II. POINTS DE CONTACT ENTRE L'OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE DES ENTREPRISES CRUCIALES ET LA RESPONSABILITE SOCIETALE DES ENTREPRISES 

1. définition de l'obligation de compliance à laquelle l'entreprise cruciale est assujettie

🔴mafr, 📝Obligation de compliance : construire une structure de compliance produisant des effets crédibles au regard des Buts Monumentaux visés par le législateur, 2025 

2. "Obligation sur obligation vaut"

🔴mafr, 📝"Obligation sur obligation vaut", 2025

3. cumul possible des deux natures, engagement de droit, engagement de fait : régime juridique (ex. La Haye, 12 nov. 2024, Shell)

🔴mafr, 📝A quoi engagent les engagements, 2025

4. ll n'existe pas d'obligation juridique générale de veiller sur autrui ; il existe des obligations spéciales, une obligation spéciale sur l'entreprise maîtresse de sa chaine de valeur et, par exemple un souci éthique que l'entreprise, par sa volonté, peut juridiciser

🔴mafr, 📝Compliance, vigilance et responsabilité civile : mettre en ordre et raison garder, 2025

III. PERSPECTIVE PROCESSUELLES DES POINTS DE CONTACT ENTRE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE ET RSE 

1. Nature transitivement systémique du contentieux de la compliance

🔴mafr, 📝Les causes systémiques portées devant le juge, 2021

🔴mafr,  📝Droit de la compliance et contentieux systémique, 2025

🔴mafr (dir.), 📕 Contentieux systémique émergent, 2025

2. Double primauté : trouver des solutions ; avoir souci du futur

🔴🧮Dans l’espace de justice, les pratiques juridictionnelles au service du futur, 2024

🔴Th. Goujon-Bethan, 📝Les enjeux présents et à venir de l'articulation des principes de procédure civile et commerciale avec la logique de compliance, 2025

3. Régression de la méthode punitive, efficacité du principe contradictoire et de l'accusatoire comme mode d'obtention des informations, engagements et "programmes"

🔴F. Ancel, 📝Devoir de vigilance et litiges commerciaux : une compétence à partager ?, 2025

🔴M. Chapuis, 📝Le juge de l'amiable et la compliance, 2025

🔴Th. Goujon-Bethan, 📝Les enjeux présents et à venir de l'articulation des principes de procédure civile et commerciale avec la logique de compliance, 2025

4. Préserver les droits de la défense et la sagesse probatoire dont les pavés sont attaqués dans le paradis de la RSE

🔴mafr, 📝Le juge, l'obligation de compliance et l'entreprise. Le système probatoire de la Compliance, 2023

🔴 mafr et M. Boissavy (dir.),📕 Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquêtes internes, CJIP, CRPC, 2024 

🔴J.-Ch. Roda, 📝La preuve de la bonne exécution de la vigilance au regard du système probatoire de compliance,2025

____

► Full Reference: D. Gutmann, "Droit fiscal et obligation de compliance" (Tax Law and Compliance Obligation), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.199-207.

____

► English summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): The author takes up the hypothesis of a Compliance Law defined by its Monumental Goals, the realisation of which is entrusted to "crucial operators" and confronts it with Tax Law. The link is particularly effective since these operators possess what governments need in this area: relevant Information.

Going further, Compliance Law can give rise to two types of obligations on the part of these operators, either towards others operators who need to be monitored, corrected or denounced, or towards themselves, when they need to make amends.

In the first part of this contribution, the author shows that Compliance Obligation reproduces the mechanism of a Tax Law which, for large companies, is embroiled in a process of increasing Globalisation. It enables Governments to aspire to the "Monumental Goals" of combating tax optimisation and impoverishing governments, victims of the erosion of the tax base, in the face of the strategies of companies that are more powerful than they are themselves, by using this very power of firms to turn it against them. Companies become the willing or de facto allies of governments, particularly when it comes to recovering tax debts, or assist them in their stated ambition to achieve social justice.  In this way, the State "manages" Tax Law by cooperating with companies.

In the second part, the author outlines the contours of this business Compliance Obligation, which is no longer simply a matter of paying tax. Beyond this financial obligation, it is more a question of mastering Information, particularly when multinational companies are subject to specific tax reporting obligations and are required to reveal their tax strategy, presumed to be transparent and coherent within the group : this legal presumption gives rise to obligations to seek information and ensure coherence, since a single tax strategy is not self-evident in a group.

The author emphasises that companies have accepted the principles governing these new compliance obligations and are tending to transform these obligations, particularly Transparency, into a communication strategy, in line with the ESG criteria that have been developed and a desire for fruitful relations with stakeholders. Therefore the tax relations developed by major companies are being extended not only to the tax authorities, but also to NGOs, by incorporating a strong ethical dimension. This is leading to new strategies, particularly in the area of Vigilance.

The author concludes: "A n’en pas douter, l’obligation de compliance existe bel et bien en matière fiscale." ("There is no doubt that the Compliance Obligation does exist in tax matters").

____

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

________

► Full Reference: J.-S. Borghetti, "Le rapport entre le Droit de la responsabilité civile et l'Obligation de Compliance" (The Relation between Tort Law and Compliance Obligation), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2024, to be published.

____

📕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) : The Author points out that in order to establish civil liability, it is first necessary to find fault, i.e. a deviation from an obligation, which will trigger a secondary obligation, that of reparation. But it can also be argued that it is from liability that this primary obligation arises, civil liability then revealing an obligation which existed only implicitly. That establishes a two-way relationship between liability and obligation. The Compliance Obligation illustrates this, in particular through the Obligation of Vigilance conceived by the French law of 2017.

The author therefore devotes the first part of his contribution to civil liability as a result of an Compliance Obligation, especially the Obligation of Vigilance. issued of the French law of 2017. After discussing whether the constraints generated by compliance should be classified as 'obligations', since there is no creditor, which therefore opens the way to liability in tort, he examines the conditions for incurring such liability, which are difficult, particularly with regard to the burden of proof and the demonstration of the causal link. The requirement concerning the latter may evolve in French law towards the admission of proportional causality, as is now accepted in certain cases in German case law.

In the second part of his contribution, the author deals with the hypothesis of civil liability as an indicator of a Compliance Obligation. He points out that the claims made, particularly in the cases of TotalOuganda  (France) and Milieudefensie v. Shell (Netherlands) seek to obtain from the judge a such "revelation".

The author considers that it is not possible to draw from the  French 2017 law which refers to article 1240 of the French Civil Code on the liability because this article is referred to only in order to organise the consequences of a breach of article L.225-102-4 of the French Commercial Code organising the Obligation of Vigilance (article 1240 being therefore under the secondary obligation described above) and not to feed what this article L.225-102-4 requires under the primary obligation (defined above). 

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "La Vigilance, pointe avancée et part totale de l’Obligation de Compliance" (Vigilance, the cutting edge and a full part of the Compliance Obligation), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance" 2025, pp. 511-536.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on the basis this contribution has been built, with  more developments, technical references and hyperlinks. 

____

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

____

► English summary of this contribution : The "duty of vigilance" unleashes all the more radical and passionate positions, sometimes among Law professors, because it has not been precisely defined. One word is used for another, either inadvertently or deliberately, deliberately if it can attract this or that element from one legal corpus and import it into another.  The very exercise of definition is therefore required in practice. There are specific obligations of vigilance that come under such and such a body of regulations and are imposed on such and such a category of operators to fulfill such and such a function. These are precise circles which are not confused and must not be confused. This is superimposed on what the French 2017 law so-called "Vigilance law", which is much more encompassing since it applies to all large companies in the operation of the value chains they have set up. The European 2024 directive is in the same way. But there is no general duty or obligation of Vigilance. Such a claim would be based on confusing or shifting each of these 3 levels, which must be avoided because no positive law does support this (I).

If the duty of vigilance is attracting so much attention, whether or not the European CS3D is fully effective, it is because Vigilance is the "cutting edge" of Compliance Obligation (II). Vigilance requires companies, by consideration of their power and without reproaching them for it or demanding that it be reduced, to detect risks of damage to the environment and climate, but also to human rights, because they are in a position to do so in order to prevent them from turning into disasters. In this respect, the  Vigilance duty makes clearer the exact legal nature of the Compliance Obligation.

Moreover, Vigilance appears as the Total Part of the Compliance Obligation (III). Indeed, although it is restricted to one area, the value chain, and to two types of risk, deterioration of the environment and deterioration of human rights, it expresses the totality of the Compliance Obligation by means of tools that the 2017 French "Vigilance law" had itself duplicated from the 2016 so-called "Sapin 2 law": to preserve systems today, but above all tomorrow, in order they do not collapse (Negative Monumental Goals), or even consolidate them (Positive Monumental Goals), so that the human beings who are willingly or unwillingly involved in them are not crushed by them but benefit from them. This is why large companies are subject to the Obligation of Compliance and Vigilance, particularly in the humanist conception that Europe is developing.

The result is a new type of Litigation, of a systemic nature, for which the Courts have spontaneously become specialised, and for which the procedures will have to be adapted and the office  of the Judge shall have to evolve.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance, Vigilance et Responsabilité civile : mettre en ordre et raison garder" (Compliance, Vigilance and Civil Liability: put in Order and keep the sense of Reason), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Lefebvre-Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.635-659.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

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

____

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

📚see the general presentation of the series "Régulations & Compliance" in which this book is published

____

► English summary of this article: The descriptions of the Liability incurred by large companies as a result of their compliance obligations are very diverse, even contradictory, going beyond the wishes that may be expressed as to what this liability should be. The first part of this study therefore sets out the various liabilities incurred by companies, which differ in the conditions under which they are implemented and in their scope, so as not to confuse them.

Indeed, as the various laws establish specific legal compliance obligations, they give rise to liabilities of varying conditions and scope, and it is not possible to avail of the regime of one in a situation that falls within the scope of another. It is therefore necessary to review the various bodies of compliance legislation, the GDPR, the ALM-FT regulations, the French so-called Sapin 2 law, the French so-called Vigilance law , the European IA Act , the European European DGA Act, etc., to recall the inflexion that each of these bodies of legislation has made to the liability rules applied to the companies subject to them. Nevertheless, the unicity of the Compliance Obligation, overcoming this necessary diversity of situations, regulations and liability regimes,  can provide grouping lines to indicate beyond this diversity the extent of the liability incurred by companies.

Once this classification has been made, the second part of the study develops the observation that none of this can create any principle of general liability on large companies in terms of compliance, and in particular not in terms of vigilance. It is not possible to deduce a general principle of specific obligations of liability or specific obligations to reparation, for example in the area of vigilance, as the texts creating specific vigilance obligation refer to the conditions of commun Tort Law (proof damage and causality), and International Public Law does not have the force to generate a general principle binding companies in this respect.

The third part stresses that it is nevertheless always possible to invoke Tort Law, and companies cannot claim to escape this. This may involve contractual liability, a situation  becoming increasingly frequent as companies contractualise their legal compliance obligations, reproducing them but also modifying them, and as Vigilance duty is an obligation that goes beyond the specific situations covered by the regulations. 

But it is essential, and this is the subject of the fourth part, not to make companies pure and simple guarantors of the state of the world, present and future. Indeed, if we were to transform sectoral compliances into illustrations of what would then be a new general principle, but one that applied only to them, they would consequently exercise the other side of this coin, namely power over others.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "À quoi engagent les engagements" (In Compliance Law, the legal consequences for Entreprises of their commitments and undertakings), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Lefebvre-Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.419-447.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

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

____

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

📚see the general presentation of the series "Régulations & Compliance" in which this book is published

____

► English summary of this article: The innocents might believe, taking the Law and its words literally, that "commitments" are binding on those who make them. Shouldn't they be afraid of falling into the trap of the 'false friend', which is what the Law wants to protect them from (as stated in the prolegomena)?

Indeed, the innocent persons think that those who make commitments ask what they must do and say what they will do. Yet, strangely enough, the 'commitments' that are so frequent and common in compliance behaviours are often considered by those who adopt them to have no binding value! Doubtless because they come under disciplines other than Law, such as the art of Management or Ethics. It is both very important and sometimes difficult to distinguish between these different Orders - Management, Moral Norms and Law - because they are intertwined, but because their respective standards do not have the same scope, it is important to untangle this tangle. This potentially creates a great deal of insecurity for companies (I).

The legal certainty comes back when commitments take the form of contracts (II), which is becoming more common as companies contractualise their legal Compliance Obligations, thereby changing the nature of the resulting liability, with the contract retaining the imprint of the legal order or not having the same scope if this prerequisite is not present.

But the contours and distinctions are not so uncontested. In fact, the qualification of unilateral undertaking of will is proposed to apprehend the various documents issued by the companies, with the consequences which are attached to that, in particular the transformation of the company into a 'debtor', which would change the position of the stakeholders with regard to it (III).

It remains that the undertakings expressed by companies on so many important subjects cannot be ignored: they are facts (IV). It is as such that they must be legally considered. In this case, Civil Liability will have to deal with them if the company, in implementing what it says, what it writes and in the way it behaves, commits a fault or negligence that causes damage, not only the sole existence of an undertaking. 

________