► Full Reference: Le Droit processuel de la Vigilance (Vigilance General Procedural Law), in cycle of conference-debates "Contentieux Systémique Émergent" ("Emerging Systemic Litigation"), organised on the initiative of the Cour d'appel de Paris (Paris Cour of Appeal), with the Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation), the Cour d'appel de Versailles (Versailles Court of Appeal), the École nationale de la magistrature - ENM (French National School for the Judiciary) and the École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris - EFB (Paris Bar School), under the scientific direction of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, November 18, 2024, 11h-12h30, Cour d'appel de Paris, Cassin courtroom

____

► Presentation of the conférence: 

____

🧮Programme of this event: 

Seventh conference-debate

LE DROIT PROCESSUEL DE LA VIGILANCE

(VIGILANCE GENERAL PROCEDURAL LAW)

Paris Court of Appeal, Cassin courtroom

Presentation and moderation par Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Professor of Regulatory and Compliance Law, Director ot the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC)

🕰️11h-11h20. 🎤, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Professor of Regulatory and Compliance Law, Director ot the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC)

🕰️11h20-11h40. 🎤, by 🕴️Natalie Fricero, Emeritus Professor of Law at Côte d'Azur University

🕰️11h40-12h30. Debate

____

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

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

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

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, coordination of the conference L'incidence du devoir de vigilance sur les litiges commerciaux (The impact of the duty of vigilance on commercial litigation), Tribunal de commerce de Paris (Paris Commercial Court), Droit & Commerce and Association Française en Faveur de l'Institution Consulaire (AFFIC), Tribunal de commerce de Paris, 25 September 2024, 5.15p.m. to 8p.m.

____

► General presentation of the conference: The Duty of Vigilance reflects the new role of firms in the world. Vigilance sometimes existed on a sectoral basis, but the 2017 French law extended it to large companies that control value chains. The French so-called "confiance" law gave the Tribunal judiciaire de Paris (Paris First Instance Civil Court) jurisdiction to hear "actions relatives" ("actions relating") to this duty. This does not mean, however, that the commercial courts will no longer have jurisdiction.

Firstly, vigilance may go beyond the scope of the 2017 French law. Secondly, vigilance may concern not only the plan drawn up by the firm, but also Commercial Contract Law or Liability Law, special Distribution Law, etc.

Commercial courts will have to develop a doctrine for dividing up and coordinating disputes, in particular by staying proceedings within certain disputes. To build a unified or at least non-contradictory case law on vigilance, we need to imagine a dialogue between judges and new procedures.

____

🧮Programme of this event: 

L'INCIDENCE DU DEVOIR DE VIGILANCE SUR LES LITIGES COMMERCIAUX

(THE IMPACT OF THE DUTY OF VIGILANCE ON COMMERCIAL LITIGATION)

Paris First Instance Commercial Court, room 1

🕰️5.15pm.-5.30pm. Welcome

🕰️5.30pm.-5.40pm. 🎤Mots d'ouverture (Opening words), by 🕴️Antoine Diesbecq, President of Droit & Commerce, attorney at the Paris Bar and 🕴️Marie-Hélène Huertas, President of AFFIC, Honorary President of Chamber of the Paris First Instance Commercial Court

🕰️5.40pm.-6pm. 🎤Devoir de vigilance et litiges commerciaux : Une compétence à partager ? (Duty of Vigilance and Commercial Litigation: A jurisdiction to share?), by 🕴️François Ancel, Judge at the Première Chambre civile de la Cour de cassation (First Civil Chamber of the French Court of cassation)

🕰️6pm.-6.20pm. 🎤Devoir de vigilance et litiges commerciaux : Expliciter les notions et qualifications en jeu (Duty of Vigilance and Commercial Litigation: Explain the concepts and qualifications involved?), by 🕴️Jean-Christophe Roda, Full Professor at Jean Moulin Lyon 3 University, Director of the Centre de Droit de l’entreprise

🕰️6.20pm.-6.40pm. 🎤Devoir de vigilance et litiges commerciaux : Anticiper l''incidence" et s’organiser (Duty of Vigilance and Commercial Litigation: Anticipating the "impact" and getting organised), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Professor of Regulatory Law and Compliance Law, Director of the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC)

🕰️6.40pm.-7pm. 🎤Conclusion (Conclusion), by 🕴️Patrick Sayer, President of the Tribunal de commerce de Paris (Paris First Instance Commercial Court)

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

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

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Devoir de vigilance : progresser" (Duty of vigilance: the way forward), in A. Bres & C. Maubernard (dir.), Le devoir de vigilance des entreprises : l'âge de la maturité ? (The duty of vigilance: the age of maturity?), Bruylant, coll. "Droit & Economie", to be published.

____

📝read the article (in French) 

____

🚧 read the bilingual Working Pape on which this article has been made, with more developments, technical references and hypertext links. 

____

► English summary of this article: In 2017 in France the so-called Vigilance law expressed great ambition. So did the draft directive. But in 2024 the European institutions moderated this ambition by refusing to increase either the type of companies subject and the constraints to which the duty of vigilance is associated. The directive has essentially halted what was for some the "march of progress". Does the ambition no longer exist? Does the future lie in an extension of the philosophy of the duty of vigilance, i.e. companies that should always be more concerned about others? This would undoubtedly be reaching the "age of maturity", where others see the age of madness, because it would be a contradiction in terms to ask a company to be concerned about anything other than its own development.

It is therefore appropriate to consider this very hypothesis of an "age of maturity" as being an ambition maintained despite a European directive which, in its adopted version, is weakened and while the oppositions are intact (I). First of all, it must be admitted that the notion of "maturity" most often conceals a value judgment when applied to a legal concept (I.A.) and that this is blatantly obvious with regard to the duty of vigilance, which is considered by some and by nature by some as a good and by others as an evil (I.B).

In order not to remain in what appears to be trench warfare, we must not get too bogged down in the reference French legislation of 2017 and what appears to be a European stutter in 2024, arguing so loudly that we can hear them reasoning in print, by paying attention to less visible and now more promising avenues of progress (II). In fact, the duty of vigilance can progress simply by the passage of time (II.A), by a better definition of the vocabulary (II.B), by the consolidation of the principles of Responsibility and Dialogue (II.C), by the uniqueness of the jurisdictional route (II.D).

This last perspective of the progress that will be made possible in France by the uniqueness of the judicial route leads to a final avenue of progress. By their very nature, laws are jolts, all the more violent for being disputed. At the moment, if we want to make progress, these two other sources - the contract and the judge - must be favoured (III). The European directive is rightly concerned with access to the courts and takes a measured view of the effectiveness of contracts as a means of making the duty of vigilance effective, with the courts having to ensure that the contract does not destroy the spirit of the system. This is what the law already organises about the relationship between the contract, the judge and the duty of compliance (III.A). What is new in Europe in 2024 is the introduction of a Supervisor (III.B). Here again, vigilance is the "cutting edge" of Compliance Law, as it is an extension of Regulatory Law. 

The result is that, through interpretation and the handling of principles, and to formulate a more general conclusion, it is the judge who holds and will hold the balance of the duty of vigilance.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Duty of vigilance: the way forward, Working Paper, December 2023/July 2024.

____

🎤 This working paper has been drawn up to serve as a basis for the conclusions of the colloquium Le devoir de vigilance: l'âge de la maturité? ("The duty of vigilance: the age of maturity?") organised by the University of Montpellier on 25 May 2023.

_____

📝 Updated and developed, it serves as the basis for the article that concludes the book Le devoir de vigilance des entreprises : l'âge de la maturité? ("The duty of vigilance: the age of maturity?"), Editions Bruylant, 2024.

____

► Working Paper summary: In 2017 in France the so-called Vigilance law expressed great ambition. So did the draft directive. But in 2024 the European institutions moderated this ambition by refusing to increase either the type of companies subject and the constraints to which the duty of vigilance is associated. The directive has essentially halted what was for some the "march of progress". Does the ambition no longer exist? Does the future lie in an extension of the philosophy of the duty of vigilance, i.e. companies that should always be more concerned about others? This would undoubtedly be reaching the "age of maturity", where others see the age of madness, because it would be a contradiction in terms to ask a company to be concerned about anything other than its own development.

It is therefore appropriate to consider this very hypothesis of an "age of maturity" as being an ambition maintained despite a European directive which, in its adopted version, is weakened and while the oppositions are intact (I). First of all, it must be admitted that the notion of "maturity" most often conceals a value judgment when applied to a legal concept (I.A.) and that this is blatantly obvious with regard to the duty of vigilance, which is considered by some and by nature by some as a good and by others as an evil (I.B).

In order not to remain in what appears to be trench warfare, we must not get too bogged down in the reference French legislation of 2017 and what appears to be a European stutter in 2024, arguing so loudly that we can hear them reasoning in print, by paying attention to less visible and now more promising avenues of progress (II). In fact, the duty of vigilance can progress simply by the passage of time (II.A), by a better definition of the vocabulary (II.B), by the consolidation of the principles of Responsibility and Dialogue (II.C), by the uniqueness of the jurisdictional route (II.D).

This last perspective of the progress that will be made possible in France by the uniqueness of the judicial route leads to a final avenue of progress. By their very nature, laws are jolts, all the more violent for being disputed. At the moment, if we want to make progress, these two other sources - the contract and the judge - must be favoured (III). The European directive is rightly concerned with access to the courts and takes a measured view of the effectiveness of contracts as a means of making the duty of vigilance effective, with the courts having to ensure that the contract does not destroy the spirit of the system. This is what the law already organises about the relationship between the contract, the judge and the duty of compliance (III.A). What is new in Europe in 2024 is the introduction of a Supervisor (III.B). Here again, vigilance is the "cutting edge" of Compliance Law, as it is an extension of Regulatory Law. 

The result is that, through interpretation and the handling of principles, and to formulate a more general conclusion, it is the judge who holds and will hold the balance of the duty of vigilance.

____

🔓read the Working Paper below⤵️

► Référence complète : Cour d'appel de Paris, Pôle 5, Chambre 12, 18 juin 2024, n° RG 21/22319, EDF

____

🏛️lire l'arrêt

____

🏛️consulter une présentation de l'arrêt rendu le même jour dans l'affaire dite TotalEnergies 

____

🏛️consulter une présentation de l'arrêt rendu le même jour dans l'affaire dite Suez

____

📰lire le communiqué de presse accompagnant le prononcé de ces trois arrêts 

________

► Référence complète : Cour d'appel de Paris, Pôle 5, Chambre 12, 18 juin 2024, n° RG 23/14348, TotalEnergies

____

🏛️lire l'arrêt

____

🏛️consulter une présentation de l'arrêt rendu le même jour dans l'affaire dite Suez

____

🏛️consulter une présentation de l'arrêt rendu le même jour dans l'affaire dite EDF

____

📰lire le communiqué de presse accompagnant le prononcé de ces trois arrêts 

________

► Référence complète : Cour d'appel de Paris, Pôle 5, Chambre 12, 18 juin 2024, n° RG 23/10583, Suez

____

🏛️lire l'arrêt

____

🏛️consulter une présentation de l'arrêt rendu le même jour dans l'affaire dite TotalEnergies 

____

🏛️consulter une présentation de l'arrêt rendu le même jour dans l'affaire dite EDF

____

📰lire le communiqué de presse accompagnant le prononcé de ces trois arrêts 

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Obligation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, "Compliance & Regulation" Serie, to be published

____

📕In parallel, a book in French L'Obligation de compliance, is published in the collection "Régulations & Compliance" co-published by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz. 

____

📚This book is inserted in this series created by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche for developing Compliance Law.

 read the presentations of the other books of this Compliance Series:

• further books:

🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche (dir.), 📘Le système probatoire de la compliance, 2025

• previous books:

​🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche (ed), 📘Compliance Juridictionnalisation, 2023

🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche (ed), 📘Compliance Monumental Goals, 2022

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Tools, 2021

____

► go to the general presentation of this 📚Series ​Compliance & Regulation, conceived, founded et managed by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, co-published par the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant. 

____

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

____

► general presentation of the book: Compliance is sometimes presented as something that cannot be avoided, which is tantamount to seeing it as the legal obligation par excellence, Criminal Law being its most appropriate mode of expression. However, this is not so evident. Moreover, it is becoming difficult to find a unity to the set of compliance tools, encompassing what refers to a moral representation of the world, or even to the cultures specific to each company, Compliance Law only having to produce incentives or translate this ethical movement. The obligation of compliance is therefore difficult to define.

This difficulty to define affecting the obligation of compliance reflects the uncertainty that still affects Compliance Law in which this obligation develops. Indeed, if we were to limit this branch of law to the obligation to "be conform" with the applicable regulations, the obligation would then be located more in these "regulations", the classical branches of Law which are Contract Law and Tort Law organising "Obligations" paradoxically remaining distant from it. In practice, however, it is on the one hand Liability actions that give life to legal requirements, while companies make themselves responsible through commitments, often unilateral, while contracts multiply, the articulation between legal requirements and corporate and contractual organisations ultimately creating a new way of "governing" not only companies but also what is external to them, so that the Monumental Goals, that Compliance Law substantially aims at, are achieved. 

The various Compliance Tools illustrate this spectrum of the Compliance Obligation which varies in its intensity and takes many forms, either as an extension of the classic legal instruments, as in the field of information, or in a more novel way through specific instruments, such as whistleblowing or vigilance. The contract, in that it is by nature an Ex-Ante instrument and not very constrained by borders, can then appear as a natural instrument in the compliance system, as is the Judge who is the guarantor of the proper execution of Contract and Tort laws. The relationship between companies, stakeholders and political authorities is thus renewed.

____

🏗️general construction of the book

The book opens with a double Introduction.  The first, which is freely accessible, is a summary of the book, while the second, which is substantial, deals with the future development of the compliance obligation in a borderless economic system.

The first part is devoted to the definition of the Compliance Obligation. 

The second part presents commitments and contracts, in certain new or classic categories, in particular public contracts, and compliance stipulations, analysed and qualified regarding Compliance Law and the various relevant branches of Law.

The third part develops the responsibilities attached to the compliance obligation.

The fourth part refers to the institutions that are responsible for the effectiveness, efficiency, and efficacy of the compliance obligation, including the judge and the international arbitrator. 

The fifth part takes the Obligation or Duty of Vigilance as an illustration of all these considerations.

____

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION : OVERVIEW

Section 1 ♦️ Main Aspects of the Book L'Obligation de Compliance, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 2 ♦️ Conceiving the unicity of the Compliance Obligation without diluting it, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

TITLE I.

IDENTIFYING THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION

CHAPTER I: NATURE OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION

Section 1 ♦️ Will, Heart and Calculation, the three marks surrounding the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 2 ♦️ Debt, as the basis of the compliance obligation, by 🕴️Bruno Deffains

Section 3 ♦️ Compliance Obligation and Human Rights, by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Racine

Section 4 ♦️ Compliance Obligation and changes in Sovereignty and Citizenship, by 🕴️René Sève

CHAPTER II: SPACES OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION

Section 1 ♦️ Industrial Entities and Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Etienne Maclouf

Section 2 ♦️ Compliance, Value Chains and Service Economy, by 🕴️Lucien Rapp

Section 3 ♦️ Compliance and conflict of laws. International Law of Vigilance-Conformity, based on recent applications in Europe, by 🕴️Louis d'Avout 

TITLE II.

ARTICULATING THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION WITH BRANCHES OF LAW

Section 1 ♦️ Constitutional dimensions of the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Stéphane Mouton

Section 2 ♦️ Tax Law and Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Daniel Gutmann

Section 3 ♦️ General Procedural Law, prototype of the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 4 ♦️ Corporate and Financial Markets Law facing the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Anne-Valérie Le Fur

Section 5 ♦️ The link between Tort Law and Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Jean-Sébastien Borghetti

Section 6 ♦️ Environmental and Climate Compliance, by 🕴️Marta Torre-Schaub

Section 7 ♦️ Competition Law and Compliance Law, by 🕴️Jean-Christophe Roda

Section 8 ♦️ The Compliance Obligation in Global Law, by 🕴️Benoît Frydman

Section 9 ♦️ Transformation of Labour Relations and Vigilance Obligation, by 🕴️Stéphane Vernac

Section 11 ♦️ Judge of Insolvency Law and Compliance Obligations, by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Barbièri

TITLE III.

COMPLIANCE : GIVE AND TAKE THE MEANS TO OBLIGE

CHAPTER I: CONVERGENCE OF SOURCES

Section 1 ♦️ Compliance Obligation, between Will and Consent: obligation upon obligation works, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 2 ♦️ What a Commitment is, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 3 ♦️ Cybersecurity and Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Michel Séjean

Section 4 ♦️  Place of Hope in the Ability to Apprehend the Future, by 🕴️

Section 5 ♦️ Legal Constraint and Company Strategies in Compliance matters, by 🕴️Jean-Philippe Denis & Nathalie Fabbe-Costes

CHAPTER II: INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN SUPPORT OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION

Section 1 ♦️ Reinforcing Compliance Commitments by referring Ex Ante to International Arbitration, by  

Section 2 ♦️ The Arbitral Tribunal's Award in Kind, in support of the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Eduardo Silva Romero

Section 3 ♦️ The use of International Arbitration to reinforce the Compliance Obligation: the example of the construction sector, by 🕴️Christophe Lapp & 🕴️Jean-François Guillemin

Section 4 ♦️ The Arbitrator, Judge, Supervisor, Support, by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Racine

Section 5 ♦️ The Arbitrator, indirect and direct agent of the Compliance Obligation?, by 🕴️Laurent Aynès

TITLE IV.

VIGILANCE, SPEARHEAD OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION

CHAPTER I: INTENSITIES OF THE VIGILANCE OBLIGATION, SPEARHEAD OF THE COMPLIANCE SYSTEM

Section 1 ♦️ Systemic Articulation between Vigilance, Due Diligence, Conformity and Compliance: Vigilance, Total Share of the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 2 ♦️ Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Financial Operators, by 🕴️Anne-Claire Rouaud

Section 3 ♦️ Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Banking and Insurance Operators, by 🕴️Mathieu Françon

Section 4 ♦️ Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Digital Operators, by 🕴️Grégoire Loiseau

Section 5 ♦️ Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Energy Operators, by 🕴️Marie Lamoureux

CHAPTER II: VARIATIONS OF TENSIONS GENERATED BY THE VIGILANCE OBLIGATION, SPEARHEAD OF THE COMPLIANCE SYSTEM

Section 1 ♦️ Rethinking the Concept of Civil Liability in the light of the Duty of Vigilance, Spearhead of Compliance, by 🕴️Mustapha Mekki

Section 2 ♦️ The transformation of governance and due diligence, by 🕴️Véronique Magnier

Section 3 ♦️ Technologies available, prescribed or prohibited to meet Compliance and Vigilance requirements, by 🕴️Emmanuel Netter

CHAPTER III: NEW MODALITIES OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION, HIGHLIGHTED BY THE VIGILANCE IMPERATIVE

Section 1 ♦️ How the Vigilance Imperative fits in with International Legal Rules, by 🕴️Bernard Haftel

Section 2 ♦️ Contracts and clauses, implementation and modalities of the Vigilance Obligation, by 🕴️Gilles J. Martin

Section 3 ♦️ Proof that Vigilance has been properly carried out with regard to the Compliance Evidence System, by 🕴️Jean-Christophe Roda

TITLE V.

THE JUDGE AND THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION

Section 1 ♦️ Present and Future Challenges of Articulating Principles of Civil and Commercial Procedure with the Logic of Compliance, by 🕴️Thibault Goujon-Bethan

Section 2 ♦️ Mediation, the way forward for an Effective Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Malik Chapuis

Section 3 ♦️ The Judge required for an Effective Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

________

► Full Reference: La vigilance, nouveau champ de contentieux systémique (Vigilance, new field of Systemic Ligation), in cycle of conference-debates "Contentieux Systémique Émergent" ("Emerging Systemic Litigation"), organised on the initiative of the Cour d'appel de Paris (Paris Cour of Appeal), with the Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation), the Cour d'appel de Versailles (Versailles Court of Appeal), the École nationale de la magistrature - ENM (French National School for the Judiciary) and the École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris - EFB (Paris Bar School), under the scientific direction of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, 26 April 2024, 11am.-12.30am., Cour d'appel de Paris, Massé courtroom

____

🧮see the full programme of the cycle Contentieux Systémique Émergent (Emerging Systemic Litigation)

____

🌐see on LinkedIn the report of this event

____

🧱read below the report of this event⤵️

____

► Presentation of the conference: The duty of vigilance imposed by the 2017 French law is being contractualised, either by ad hoc contracts or by stipulations that reproduce the legal provisions, adjust them or go beyond them. This adoption by the Contract and Tort Law is valuable but not without risk. The systemic scope of the underlying law on the one hand and of economic structures on the other, the firm or the value chain, will permeate litigation. The example of labour relations is instructive in this respect.

____

🧮Programme of this event: 

Second conference-debate

LA VIGILANCE, NOUVEAU CHAMP DE CONTENTIEUX SYSTÉMIQUE

(VIGILANCE, NEW FIELD OF SYSTEMIC LITIGATION)

Paris Court of Appeal, Massé courtroom

General presentation of the topic and moderation by 🕴️François Ancel, Judge at the Première Chambre civile de la Cour de cassation (First Civil Chamber of the French Court of cassation)

🕰️11am.-11.20am. 🎤Le contentieux émergent de la Vigilance dans les rapports contractuels (Emerging Vigilance Litigation in Contractual Relationships), by 🕴️Jean-Christophe Roda, Full Professor at Jean-Moulin Lyon 3 University

🕰️11.20am.-11.40am. 🎤Le contentieux émergent de la Vigilance dans les relations de travail (Emerging Vigilance Litigation in Employment Relationships), by 🕴️Cyril Cosme, Director of the French Office of the International Labour Organization (ILO)

🕰️11.40am.-12.30am. Debate

____

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

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

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

____

🧱read below a detailed presentation of this event⤵️

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le rôle du juge dans le déploiement du droit de la régulation par le droit de la compliance" ("Synthesis: The role of the Judge in the deployment of Regulatory Law through Compliance Law"), Synthesis in Conseil d'État (French Council of State) and Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation), De la régulation à la compliance : quel rôle pour le juge ? Regards croisés du Conseil d'Etat et de la Cour de cassation - Colloque du 2 juin 2023, La Documentation française, "Droits et Débats" Serie, 2024, pp. 173-182

____

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

____

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

____

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

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

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

____

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

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

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

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

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

____

📝read article (in French)

________

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le juge dans les contentieux de vigilance", participation à la "table ronde sur le devoir de vigilance", audition par la Commission d'enquête du Sénat sur les moyens mobilisés et mobilisables par l'État pour assurer la prise en compte et le respect par le groupe TotalEnergies des obligations climatiques et des orientations de la politique étrangère de la France, 26 février 2024, 16h-17h30

____

 📺regarder la présentation préliminaire de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche relative à l'office du juge dans le devoir de vigilance

____

📺regarder en différé l'ensemble de la table ronde

____

📓lire le rapport de la commission d'enquête du Sénat

____

⚖️ Cette audition a été menée en considération de règles spécifiques à ma situation dans la mesure où d'une part le Droit interdit sous peine de sanction pénale à la personne convoquée de refuser de se présenter et ou d'autre part j'ai immédiatement rappelé au secrétariat de la Commission d'Enquête qu'ayant été Amica Curiae dans le litige opposant les associations Les Amis de la Terre et  autres en demande et le groupe TotalEnergie en défense, l'objet du litige portant sur des manquements allégués d'obligations découlant de devoir de vigilance, le statut d'Amica Curiae a conduit pendant cette instance à ne pas connaître le dossier et à continuer de ne pas le connaître pendant une période raisonnable après l'audience du 26 octobre 2022 et le jugement du 28 février 2024 dans le cas dit "Total Ouganda", ce qui conduit nécessairement par application aux règles juridiques et de déontologie à ne pas répondre à certaines questions. 

Dans le respect de ces contraintes, il est répondu le mieux possible pour éclairer la Commission d'Enquête.

Cette audition est à mettre en corrélation avec l'audition qui s'est déroulée devant la Commission ... de l'Assemblée Nationale ....

____

► Organisation de la Table Ronde : En accord avec le secrétariat de la Commission d'Enquête, et afin de rendre le plus fructueux possible le premier temps de cette table ronde ayant pour objet Le devoir de vigilance, dans la mesure où il apparaît que dans l'ensemble des auditions programmées, c'est sans doute là où se concentre le plus l'expertise juridique, les 4 intervenants se sont préalablement réunis pour éviter le double écueil soit de traiter deux fois la même chose soit de laisse une dimension du sujet non traité.

Ainsi la première intervenante traite de la façon dont les entreprises élaborent les plans de vigilance, le deuxième intervenant développe la façon dont elles intègrent leur devoir de vigilance dans leur déploiement international, notamment par des mécanismes contractuels, le troisième intervenant expose ce que, dans les contentieux, les demandeurs (qui sont souvent des ONG) allèguent, ce qui m'a conduit en dernier lieu à exposer ce qu'il en est de l'office du juge en la matière.

Il en résulte que mon intervention de 8 minutes aborde plus particulièrement de la question de l'office du juge dans la mise en application du devoir de vigilance.

____

🔲consulter les slides servant de support à cette intervention

____

► Présentation de l'intervention préliminaire : En premier lieu, j'ai souligné qu'en l'état du droit positif, le droit français repose sur le juge puisque la loi pose une Obligation de Vigilance, qui est à la fois une obligation générale et de moyens, l'entreprise devant montrer qu'elle fait ses "meilleurs efforts", cette obligation générale, qui n'est pas limitée à l'environnement, étant déclinée d'une façon particulière par l'entreprise en fonction de ses risques particuliers et de ses engagements propres, notamment contractuels, tandis que le juge applique ce système au cas par cas. 

La loi de 2017 a voulu confier ce pouvoir au juge et a voulu un système simple en donnant la seule compétence au seul Tribunal Judiciaire de Paris, ce qui permet d'obtenir une interprétation jurisprudentielle, aussi bien sur les questions procédurales et substantielles, immédiatement unifiée, le dialogue des juges devant être toujours favorisé, tandis que la spécialisation et la formation de ces juges étant un enjeu auquel les juridictions ont répondu concrètement, la Cour d'appel de Paris ayant mis en place une chambre spécialisée, tandis qu'une formation spécialisée sur ces "contentieux systémiques émergents" d'un type nouveau se met en place. Cette spécialisation rend moins impérieuse l'établissement d'une Autorité administrative de supervision.

Cette présence du juge ne doit pas être présentée ni perçue comme pathologique car le procès de vigilance est dans l'ordre des choses, les parties prenantes trouvant une voie d'expression : d'une part plus les entreprises développeront en amont le dialogue et moins il y aura de contentieux et d'autre part le procès lui-même, en continuum, doit favoriser ce dialogue, par le contradictoire et par la médiation.. C'est une part essentielle de l'office du juge qui doit aussi faire respecter le Droit et apporter des solutions à ces enjeux systémiques, la remédiation (plutôt que trancher et sanctionner) étant une voie de son office à développer.

Parce que les juridictions concernées ont su ajuster leur organisation interne et les juges adapter leur office, la généralité de la loi de 2017 permettant précisément cela, la question de l'adoption ou de la non-adoption de la directive CS3D n'étant de ce fait pas un enjeu dramatique parce que le juge est déjà au centre de la vigilance, il convient plutôt de laisser le temps que l'oeuvre de jurisprudence se fasse.

________

► Référence complète : I. Grossi, "Du nouveau sur les contours du devoir de vigilance", La lettre juridique, n° 973, 8 février 2024

____

► Résumé de l'article (fait par l'auteur) : "Le tribunal judiciaire de Paris a eu l’occasion de se prononcer pour la première fois, au fond, dans un jugement didactique et équilibré, en matière de plan de vigilance. Selon lui, le plan de vigilance de la société La Poste doit être complété par des mesures concrètes, adéquates et efficaces en cohérence avec la cartographie des risques. Le tribunal ne va cependant pas jusqu’à décider à sa place de la mesure la plus appropriée.".

____

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

________

► Référence complète : A. Oumedjkane, "Le tribunal judiciaire de Paris livre sa première interprétation de la loi relative au devoir de vigilance", JCP A, n° 3, 22 janvier 2024, commentaire 2016, pp. 1-3

____

► Résumé de l'article (fait par l'auteur) : "Solution. – Après de longs parcours judiciaires, une première affaire relative au devoir de vigilance d’une société a donné lieu à un jugement au fond.
Impact. – C’est l’occasion pour le juge de clarifier tout à la fois ses attendus quant aux mesures qui doivent composer le plan de vigilance et le rôle qu’il entend jouer à travers l’utilisation de ses pouvoirs d’injonction."

____

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

________

► Référence complète : J.-B. Barbièri, "Devoir de vigilance : la fin du début ?", JCP G, n° 3, 22 janvier 2024, note 85, pp. 126-129

____

► Résumé de l'article (fait par l'auteur) : "Solution. - Le juge, en présence d’un plan de vigilance incomplet, peut enjoindre la société défaillante de le compléter, mais ne peut pas s’y substituer pour faire adopter des mesures spécifiques. Il peut en revanche enjoindre à la société « d’élaborer [...] des actions complémentaires plus concrètes et efficaces en lien le cas échéant avec un risque identifié ».

Impact. - Les plaideurs prendront attention à ne pas solliciter des mesures spécifiques qu’ils souhaiteraient voir adoptées par l’invocation du plan de vigilance. En revanche, en présence d’un « risque identifié », ce qui suppose qu’il le soit, ils pourront demander au juge des « actions complémentaires », dont l’étendue reste à déterminer. Du côté de l’élaboration du plan, il importe que les risques soient correctement identifiés, le standard à suivre étant que le plan « doit permettre au public et aux parties prenantes de connaître l’identification précise des risques », faute de quoi les mesures d’atténuation des risques seraient d’office insuffisantes.".

____

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

____

► Référence complète : TJ Paris, 5ème chambre, 2ème section, ordonnance du juge de la mise en état, 6 juillet 2023, n° RG 22/03403, TotalÉnergies

____

🏛️lire la décision

____

📝commentaires de la décision :

• Dalloz actualité, 13 juillet 2023, obs. J.-B. Barbièri & A. Touzain 
• Rev. sociétés, 2023, p.793, obs. A. Danis-Fatôme & N. Hoffschir 
• Gaz. pal., 19 septembre 2023, n° 29, n°GPL453l6, pp. 2-3, note V. Mazeaud
• Bull. Joly, novembre 2023, n° BJS202m8, pp. 17-19, note E. Schlumberger

________

🌐 follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Conceiving Power, Working Paper, December 2021

____

📝 This Working Paper serves as the basis for an article to be published in the collective book drawn up in tribute to Professor Emmanuel Gaillard. 

____

► Working Paper summary: In 1985, Emmanuel Gaillard's central work came out under the title Le pouvoir en droit privé  (The Power in Private Law)📎!footnote-2418, but when it was defended in 1981, his thesis directed by Dean Cornu was entitled La notion de pouvoir en droit privé (The notion of Power in Private Law) 📎!footnote-2419.

Let's give full force to the original title of the thesis.  

The deletion of the term notion perhaps implies that by defining something the essential is done, that there would be something of a pleonasm in aiming at The notion of Power and The Power, as Law likes to economise on words.  

But it was indeed a renewed, simpler and more powerful conception of the notion of Power, containing the entire regime necessarily imputed, that this work imposed, henceforth illuminating positive Law. Emmanuel Gaillard's definition, on the other hand, goes beyond Private Law. We would gladly have argued in favour of retaining the heading for the term Notion, proposing instead to dispense with the reference to Private Law alone ....

Perhaps it was because the concept is so vast that in this seminal thesis its scope was restricted to Private Law, since the author already had to account for the sheer multiplicity of manifestations in this part of the legal system; Or perhaps it was because the concept of 'Power' is so familiar in Public Law that it would have needed less definition in Public Law (which, moreover, is so diversely proposed in this more political area, which is already careful on principle to distinguish between powers, which must always be plural in order to be separated), and that it was therefore reasonable to want to arrive at a single concept of Power in Private Law, where the notion of subjective rights is more familiar. 

However, Emmanuel Gaillard's definition of Power as a prerogative placed, by legal rule or contract, in the hands of the person invested with them for the benefit, at least in part, of others, covers both Public and Private Law. This even contributes to the solidity of this thesis and explains why it flourishes today in legal systems where the distinction between Private Law and Public Law is weakening.

The power of this definition lies in its simplicity. Simple and brave minds are often the most fruitful. As Dean Gérard Cornu points out in his preface, the author, in particular because he bases himself more on positive law, for example that relating to the powers of corporate officers, does not get bogged down in discussions between authors only to end up preferring one over the other. He arrives at a definition that is close to our everyday experience: the one we experience when we collect an envelope on behalf of someone else and the agent asks us in what capacity we claim to be doing this on his behalf. We then show him our 'power', the legal power to do so for the benefit of the person to whom the letter is addressed, and can thus exercise the power to withdraw the letter, even though it is personal. When legal and common sense come together, it is a good omen, not only in terms of form, because everyone can understand it and the Law must remain comprehensible, but also in terms of substance, because everyone must be able to control the exercise of a power that is exercised for and over others. For this letter addressed to someone else, the person who has been able to take it by virtue of the power conferred on him/her, could just as easily open it and read it, then destroy it or give it to the worst enemy of the person to whom it was addressed. In Power, there is always might to do, and the danger to others that Power contains therefore. 

This highly legal definition of Power not only distances the holder from his/her own interests, but also channels the Power thus granted to the person who benefits from it. In this respect, Emmanuel Gaillard not only distinguished between Power and subjective right, but also identified the right amount of power required for this power to effectively fulfill this 'Mission', through the notion of abuse of power, when the holder uses for other beneficiaries this power that was conferred on him/her for this sole purpose.

What is more, this concept makes it possible to distinguish Power from discretionary force, because the holder of Power thereby exercises factual , by acting for others, deciding for others, deciding on others. Because Power is inseparable from might, but might must remain the means of power and no more, the Law shall produce the antibodies that are not only the theory of abuse of power but also an Ex Ante responsibility that accounts must always be rendered, either to the other for whom everything is done or to a third party. For this third party is often there from the outset, the guardianship judge for example: because the Power was put in place because of the beneficiary's weakness, both in himself/herself and because of the situation, an impartial and disinterested third party is needed to ensure proper execution from the outset, without there even being a dispute. In this respect, how useful this thesis is for thinking about what Supervision is today!  

This thesis, so clear, so simple and so strong, goes beyond Private or Civil Law. It is both much more restrictive than the more factual and political definition of Oower, which would be the ability to do something, and much broader than the usual definitions, since it embraces and legitimises de jure all situations where a person acts legally for the benefit of another.  Dean Cornu shows, moreover, in two sentences that such a notion of power also captures the office of the judge, who has power over others only to serve them 📎!footnote-2420. The definition corresponds to the mission of one who has power only to fulfill his office. It suits so well the conception we have today of Administration, especially if it takes the form of independent authorities.

Moreover, Power thus contains its own limit in its very definition, since others are present in it: the holder has power only to serve others. From then on, it is only a power because it is a kind of Charge. Emmanuel Gaillard immediately uses the term: "Un individu se voit confier une charge qu'il exerce dans un intérêt au moins partiellement distinct du sien propre"  ("An individual is entrusted with an office which he exercises in an interest at least partially distinct from his own") 📎!footnote-2422. Dean Carbonnier, who reformed the legislation in this area 📎!footnote-2456,, emphasised that the guardian has a public duty because the State entrusts him/her with a child. In the same way parental authority is a charge on the parents for the benefit of the children. More generally, Power is a burden that the Law places on a person to satisfy the interests of another.

This definition offered by Emmanuel Gaillard in 1981, anchored in Private Law only insofar as it is the entire legal system, is premonitory of the Regulatory and Compliance Law as it unfolds today. It would be enough to continue the Gaillard's sentences, as if they had been half-written, to finish them 40 years later and find in them the mechanisms of Supervision of companies by public authorities which are now in place not to reduce their power but to ensure that they exercise it for the benefit of others 📎!footnote-2457. The whole evolution of Company Law and Financial Law is here. Between the lines of this thesis, which develops the notion of duty 📎!footnote-2421, we can also see what positive Law is developing today, in particular through the 'duty of Vigilance', this personal responsibility for the benefit of others (I).

The definition of Power thus conceived contains within itself its regime and enables us to anticipate it better today: because the holder exercises Power only for others, at least partially, he is consubstantially accountable for it, responsibility being only one form of this accountability; because this service must be effective and others must benefit fully from it, because unlike the subjective right which allows the holder freely not to use his might, Power has never been the 'most absolute' availability to use his/her might: it is even the opposite. It is the expression of a Power assigned to a purpose, compelling the holder to use his/her Power to that end.  But it is equally necessary for the holder to have all the might to do so, otherwise the very notion of 'Power' is meaningless. This is the definition that should be given to the principle of Proportionality: the person on whom the Power rests must have not more power than is necessary, but all the power necessary to achieve the Monumental Goals for which the Power has been entrusted to him/her, so that others may derive full benefit from it (II). 

In today's positive Law, the definition of Power as a Duty is found not only in Private Law but also in Public Law, not least because pure might, i.e. those that do not account for the use of their might, are in decline while concern for others is on the increase. The days of discretionary powers are over, and the increased independence of those who exercise Power over others requires them to be accountable. Beyond this Accountability, the personal Responsibility of those who have the Power to serve others is being established. But, no doubt because the Law is slow to evolve, the correlative idea that the holder of Power must have all the powers required to carry out his/her mission is less entrenched:  As Emmanuel Gaillard has shown, the Law has only gone part of the way in sanctioning excesses of power, when the holder uses his/her power for other goals, but it has not yet clearly established that the holder - sometimes forced - of a Power is legitimate in using all the means required to achieve the result for which this Power, i.e. a charge and a duty, has been conferred on him/her.  

No doubt we need to read Emmanuel Gaillard's thesis again in all its potential, to imagine the reading we could do today of what he could have written as if on blank pages that would write themselves, a magical thesis where everything is already there, a thesis so short (250 pages) and so beautiful, so dense that it already contains the Law of the Future. The Law of the Future 📎!footnote-2458  where there must be much more responsibility for the benefit of others📎!footnote-2423 and powers since this notion includes others who are the beneficiaries. Droit de l'Avenir where Emmanuel Gaillard will be present, in particular thanks to this work of doctrine offered in 1981.  So that, in practical terms, those who are entrusted with looking after others - for example, today all companies obliged by Compliance Law to look after others so that they are not destroyed by hatred in the digital space, by corruption in the economic system or by climate change in a projected future - do not find themselves challenged by the same Law for the means of exercising this power for the benefit of others, for example when this involves 'judging'. Dean Cornu himself emphasised the identity of the two offices.

____

Lire les développement ci-dessous⤵