Référence complète : Marcou, G., L'ordre public économique aujourd'hui. Un essai de redéfinition, in, Revet, TH. et Vidal, L. Annales de la régulation, IRJS, 2009, p.79 et s.

Le plan est  actualisé chaque semaine au fur et à mesure que les leçons se déroulent en amphi.

Il est disponible ci-dessous.

 

 

Retourner à la présentation générale du cours, tel qu'il était bâti et proposé en 2018.

 

 

 

 

 

The procedural guarantees from which the person benefits are mainly the right of action, the rights of defense and the benefit of the adversarial principle.

While the rights of the defense are subjective rights which are advantages given to the person at risk of having his situation affected by the decision that the body which is formally or functionally legally qualified as a "tribunal", may take, the adversarial principle is rather a principle of organization of the procedure, from which the person can benefit.

This principle, as the term indicates, is - as are the rights of the defense - of such a nature as to generate all the technical mechanisms which serve it, including in the silence of the texts, imply a broad interpretation of these.

The adversarial principle implies that the debate between all the arguments, in particular all the possible interpretations, is possible. It is exceptionally and justified, for example because of urgency or a justified requirement of secrecy (professional secrecy, secrecy of private life, industrial secrecy, defense secrecy, etc.) that the adversarial mechanism is ruled out. , sometimes only for a time (technique of deferred litigation by the admission of the procedure on request).

This participation in the debate must be fully possible for the debater, in particular access to the file, knowledge of the existence of the instance, the intelligibility of the terms of the debate, not only the facts, but also the language (translator, lawyer , intelligibility of the subject), but still discussion on the applicable legal rules). So when the court automatically comes under the rules of Law, it must submit them to adversarial debate before possibly applying them.

The application of the adversarial principle often crosses the rights of the defense, but in that it is linked to the notion of debate, it develops all the more as the procedure is of the adversarial type.

Sont ici répertoriés les sujets proposés chaque année, soit au titre du travail à faire en parallèle du cours, à remettre à la fin du semestre (le jour de l'examen étant la date limite de remise), soit les sujets à traiter sur table, sans documentation extérieure et sous surveillance le jour de l'examen final. 

A partir de 2019, en raison du règlement administratif de la scolarité, l'examen final ne peut plus se dérouler en dehors du cours.

Les étudiants cessent donc de bénéficier d'une durée de 4 heures pour réaliser l'examen.

Le contrôle final est donc nécessairement réalisé pendant la durée de 2 heures du dernier cours de l'enseignement, supprimé pour être remplacé par ce contrôle sur table. Les sujets sont désormais choisis en considération de ce format. 

 

Retourner sur la description générale du Cours de Droit commun de la Régulation, comprenant notamment des fiches méthodologiques. 

Référence complète : Grandjean, J.P., rapporteur, Rapport sur l'avocat chargé d'une enquête interne, Conseil de l'Ordre des Avocats, Paris, 8 mars 2016. 

 

Lire le rapport. 

 

Référence complète : Lagarde, Ch., A regulatory Approch to FinTech, mai 2018. 

 

Lire l'article. 

Le légicentrisme exprime avant tout une bataille de normes, puisque cette doctrine pose que la loi est la seule et unique expression de la souveraineté de la Nation. En cela, la loi dispose d'une autorité indépassable et c'est elle qui fonde l'État légal.

Ainsi, si l'on devait donner une figure au système juridique, ce serait un cercle avec en son cœur d'une façon unique la loi souveraine, à la fois autosuffisante dans son fondement (souveraineté) et dans sa production (principe de légalité).

Cette conception moniste (unité de la loi) a pour principale source la philosophie politique de Jean-Jacques Rousseau, c'est encore sur celui-ci que la France conserve le principe de souveraineté parlementaire (le Gouvernement est responsable devant le Parlement) et de souveraineté de la loi. Mais depuis la Révolution française, les esprits et les faits ont changé.

Ainsi, s'est construite une doctrine inverse : le "pluralisme juridique" qui pose en contradiction que le droit vient de nombreuses sources, comme la coutume, les pratiques, les jugements, etc. Il n'est pas étonnant que les auteurs qui affirment le pluralisme juridique ne viennent pas de la philosophie politique mais davantage de la sociologie comme Gurvitch ou Carbonnier.

En outre, les frontières nationales ont perdu de leur consistance, de fait et de droit. C'est pourquoi un auteur comme Mireille Delmas-Marty s'appuie sur le fait même de la construction de l'Europe des droits de l'homme d'une part et de la globalisation d'autre part pour affirmer que le légicentrisme a fait place à un pluralisme juridique généralisé.

Cependant, en droit positif les textes restent les mêmes. C'est ainsi que l'article 6 de la Déclaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen de 1789, qui fait partie du bloc de constitutionnalité, dispose de la loi que "la loi est l'expression de la volonté générale".

De la même façon, l'article 5 du Code civil continue d'interdire au juge de rendre des jugements contraignants pour d'autres cas que celui particulier sur lequel il se prononce.

Cette permanence des textes les plus gradés, à savoir l'article 5 du Code civil et l'article 6 de la déclaration pose de nombreux problèmes aux juges. En effet, depuis l'arrêt du Tribunal des conflits Blanco, le droit administratif n'est plus lié par ce qui est posé par le Code civil et sans doute la puissance normative du Conseil d'Etat s'exprime plus ouvertement que celle de la Cour de cassation, qui feint de ne rendre que des arrêts de principe pour pouvoir affirmer qu'elle ne rend pas d'arrêt de règlement.

D'une façon plus complexe, le Conseil constitutionnel rappelle régulièrement que certes il est le gardien de la norme constitutionnelle supérieure à la loi mais quand le même temps, seul le législateur, puisque celui est le souverain, peut exprimer la volonté générale, ce à quoi le Conseil constitutionnel ne peut se substituer.

Mais le Droit de l'Union européenne, qui constitue un Ordre juridique à la fois autonome et dont les normes sont pourtant intégrées dans les ordres juridiques des Etats-membres, rend difficilement soutenable la conception du légicentrisme. Y a succédée une hiérarchie des normes complexes. Mais les fondements politiques de l'idée de légicentrisme alimente en grande partie l'hostilité à l'égard de l'Europe, aussi bien celle de l'Union que celle de la CEDH.

 

"Liberalization" refers to the process of the legal end of a monopolistic organization of an economy, a sector or a market, in order to open it up to Competition.

Since it is rare for an economy to be entirely monopolistic (which presupposes an extreme concentration of political power), the phenomenon is more particularly characteristic of public sectors. Liberalization, if it is translated into Law only by a declaration of openness to Competition, is actually achieved only by a much slower implementation of the latter, since the incumbent operators have the power to check the entry of potential new entrants. This is why the process of liberalization is only effective if strong regulatory authorities are established to open up the market, weakening incumbent operators where necessary and offering benefits to new entrants through asymmetric regulation .

This Regulation aims to build Competition, now permitted by law.

This is why, in a process of Liberalization, Regulation aims to concretizeCcompetition by constructing it. This transitional regulation is intended to be withdrawn and the institutions set up to disappear, for example by becoming merely specialized chambers of the General Competition Authority, Regulation being temporary when linked to liberalization.

It is distinct from the Regulation of essential infrastructures which, as natural monopolies, must be definitively regulated. Quite often, in liberal economies, the State has asked public enterprises to manage such monopolies, particularly in the network industries, to which it has also entrusted the economic activity of the entire sector. By the liberalization phenomenon, most States have opted to retain the management of infrastructure for this operator, now an incumbent operator competing on the competing activities offered to consumers. In this respect, the Regulator forces it in two ways: in a transitional way to establish competition for the benefit of new entrants, in a definitive way insofar as it has been chosen by the State to manage the economic monopoly of infrastructure.

Even in the only relationship between competitors, Regulation has difficulty to retreat, and this often due to the Regulator. Max Weber's sociological rules  administration show about administration that the regulatory authorities, even in view of the purpose of competitive development, for example in the field of telecommunications, seek to remain, even though competition has actually been built. It does it by finding new purposes (in the above sector, the regulator could be the guardian of Net Neutralityt) or by affirming to practice a permanent "symmetric Regulation".

Référence : Grenoble, 5 nov. 2020, I.D. c/ Société Corin France

Lire l'arrêt. 

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

____

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

 

 

The economic theory of incentives implicitly assumes that an operator can not be compelled to act against his will, or at least that it is more efficient to offer him advantages in such a way that he does what he wants . In this, this conception is opposed to the traditional conception of Law, which posits, on the contrary, that subjects obey the order dictated by the legal norm.

But in globalized markets, operators have the tools to disobey and the asymmetry of information diminishes the power of control of the Regulators, which raises doubts as to the effectiveness of the legal constraint: it is not enough that the Law orders. In these circumstances, texts, regulators and judges must produce conditions that encourage agents to adopt behaviors that are consistent with the aims sought by the Regulators because the operators themselves have an interest in them.

Thus, whilst regulatory systems in any sector become increasingly repressive, even in liberal economies, it is not so much to punish the perpetrator but to incite others who are tempted to commit crimes, To abandon them. It is the system of exemplarity. This thought prior to Beccaria participates in the re-feoadization of the Law, demonstrated by Pierre Legendre, associated with the decline of the State and to which the Regulation fully participates. Judgeshave little inclination to handle repression in this way, which creates a clash between Criminal Law and Regulatory Law, which nevertheless puts repression at its center.

In the same way, Regulatory Systems must inject positive incentives, for example rewards for communication of information, which encourages delation, or incentives done by the regulator for the network manager make investments in the maintenance of it, against the immediate interest of its shareholder. Finally, all patent law and economics are now thought of as an incentive to inn/en/article/innovation/ovate. But, some incentives have proven perverse such as stock-options or bonuses. As a result, new texts seek to regulate these.

Référence complète Fox, E., The new world order, in Mélanges Joël Monéger, Liber Amicorum en l'honneur du Professeur Joël Monéger, LexisNexis, 2017, 818 p.  

 

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is the independent regulatory authority in the United States that regulates at the federal level both the container and the content of telecommunications.

In this, the United States differs from the European Union, a legal space in which most often the regulatory institutions of the container and the content are distinct (for example in France ARCEP / CSA / CNIL) and in which the regulations of communications remain substantially at the level of the Member States of the Union.

Like other audiovisual regulators, it ensures pluralism of information by limiting the concentration of capital - and therefore of power - in the television and radio sector. We can thus see that the American system is not in principle different from the European system.

In addition, the FCC is characterized first of all by a very great power, imposing at the same time substantial principles on the operators, like that of the "decency", going in the name of this principle until sanctioning television channels which had let show a bare breast of a woman. The control is therefore more substantial than in Europe, this control weighing against the constitutional freedom of expression which is more powerful in the United States than in Europe. It is true that today the leading digital companies tend to formulate for us what is beautiful, good and decent, in place of public authorities.

The FCC continued to develop the major principles of the public communication system, as in 2015 that of the Open Internet (Open Internet) or to formulate the principle of "digital neutrality", adopted by a federal law, this principle having considerable economic and political implications.

But at the same time, a general mark of American law, the judge moderates this power, according to the principle of Check and Balance. Thus the Supreme Court of the United States in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation in 1978 this power of direct control of the content but also operates the control of the control.

The election in 2016 of a new president who is, among other things, totally hostile to the very idea of ​​Regulation is a test in the probative sense of the term. In January 2017, he appointed a new president of the FCC, hostile to any regulation and in particular to the principle of neutrality. The question which arises is to know if technically a regulation already established on these principles can resist, how and for how long, a political will violently and expressly contrary. And what will the judges do.

Référence complète : Lalande, P.-A., Le pouvoir d’injonction au service de la réparation du préjudice écologique : une mise en œuvre de l’office du juge administratif en matière climatique, Actu-Juridique, 9 décembre 2021.

____

 

Lire l'article. 

_____

A monopoly refers to the power of a person to remove from a good its utility by excluding others. The monopoly refers to a situation on the market, the monopolist being the sole operator in the market. Lawyers are accustomed to the monopoly conferred by Law, for example the one that was the monopoly for the national public enterprise for electricity. In this case, what is done may be defeated, and the legislature may withdraw that privilege especially if the author of this norm is better placed in the hierarchy of norms than the previous author. For example, the European Union legislature withdrew the legal monopolies by means of directives from most of the operators holding them in the regulated sectors in order to liberalize them.

But the monopoly can have an economic source. Indeed, it may happen that a first operator constructs a structure, for example a wired telecommunications transport network. Because he is alone, agents on the market must resort to him to carry their communications, his business will be profitable. But from there, if a second operator built such an infrastructure, it would inevitably be in deficit for insufficient applicants. This is why no rational economic agent will build a second network. Thus, this network will remain unique. It is then an economically acquired monopoly that the legislative will can not change its nature. That is why it is called "natural".

Since what is can not be changed, Community law has taken note of the monopolistic nature of the majority of networks and the correlated power of their owner or manager, but has correlatively provided for their supervision by a regulator who not only Ex post to resolve possible differences between the infrastructure manager, the natural essential facility, and the one who wants to access it, but also, through an Ex ante power, to negotiate with that manager the return on his capital, his commitments investment in the network, etc., or even more directly by imposing on it the way in which it fixes access tariffs and so on.

These economically natural monopolies are therefore more powerful than legal monopolies, which States and lawyers have taken a long time to understand, but this also explains the reverse tendency of economists to write laws, The texts must handle this type of notions, its writers caring little about the political order and legal notions. The fact that the laws and regulations on regulated situations and supervised operators have long been elaborated solely from the point of view of lawyers, particularly of the public service, which was regrettable, does not justify this passage from one extreme to the other.

The procedural safeguards enjoyed by a person whose situation may be affected by a future judgment are principally the right to bring proceedings before the court, the rights of the defense and the benefit of the contradictory principle.

The legal action was for a long time considered as a "power", that is to say, a mechanism inserted in the organization of the judicial institution, since it was by this act of seizure, access by which the person enters the judicial machine, through the latter starts up.

But in particular since the work of René Cassin and Henri Motulsky, legal proceedings are considered as a subjective right, that is to say, a prerogative of any person to ask a judge to rule on the claim that the plaintiff articulates in an allegation, that is a story mixing the fact and the law in a building and on which he asks the judge to give an answer, such as the cancellation of an acte, or the award of damages, or the refusal to convict him (because the defense is also the exercise of this right of action).

The legal action is now recognized as a "right of action", the nature of which is independent of the application made to the court, a subjective procedural right which doubles the substantive subjective right (eg the right to reparation) and ensures the effectiveness of the latter but which is autonomous of it. This autonomy and this uniqueness in contrast with the variety of the sort of disputes (civil, criminal or administrative) makes the right of action a pillar of the "Procedural Law" on which a part of European and Constitutional Law are built. In fact, Constitutional Law in Europe is essentially constituted by procedural principles (rights of defense, impartiality, right of action), since the principle of non bis in idem is only an expression of the right of action. Non bis in idem is a prohibition of double judgment for the same fact which does not prohibit a double trigger of the action (and criminal, civil and administrative). This unified due process of Law has helped to diminish the once radical separation between criminal law, administrative law and even civil law, which are clearly separated from one another in the traditional construction of legal systems and which converge today in the Regulatory and Compliance Law.

Moreover, the subjective right of action is a human right and one of the most important. Indeed, it is "the right to the judge" because by its exercise the person obliges a judge to answer him, that is to say to listen to his claim (the contradictory resulting therefore from the exercise of the right of action ).

Thus the right of action appears to be the property of the person, of the litigant, of the "party". This is why the attribution by the law of the power for the Regulators to seize itself, which is understood by reason of the efficiency of the process, poses difficulty from the moment that this constitutes the regulatory body in "judge and party", since the Regulator is in criminal matters regarded as a court, and that the cumulation of the qualification of court and of the quality of party is a consubstantial infringement of the principle of impartiality. In the same way, the obligation that Compliance Law creates for operators to judge themselves obliges them to a similar duplication which poses many procedural difficulties, notably in internal investigations.

There is a classical distinction between public action, which is carried out by the public prosecutor, by which the public prosecutor calls for protection of the general interest and private action by a person or an enterprise, which seeks to satisfy its legitimate private interest. The existence of this legitimate interest is sufficient for the person to exercise his or her procedural right of action.

In the first place, the person could not claim the general interest because he or she was not an agent of the State and organizations such as associations or other non-governmental organizations pursued a collective interest, which could not be confused with the general interest. This procedural principle according to which "no one pleads by prosecutor" is today outdated. Indeed, and for the sake of efficiency, Law admits that persons act in order that the rule of law may apply to subjects who, without such action, would not be accountable. By this procedural use of the theory of incentives, because the one who acts is rewarded while and because he or she serves the general interest, concretizing the rule of law and contributing to produce a disciplinary effect on a sector and powerful operators, procedural law is transformed by the economic analysis of the law. The US mechanism of the class action was imported into France by a recent law of 2014 on "group action" (rather restrictive) but this "collective action" , on the Canadian model, continues not to be accepted in the European Union , Even if the European Commission is working to promote the mechanisms of private enforcement, participating in the same idea.

Secondly, it may happen that the law requires the person not only must have a "legitimate interest in acting" but also must have a special quality to act. This is particularly true of the various corporate officers within the operators. For the sake of efficiency, the legal system tends to distribute new "qualities to act" even though there is not necessarily an interest, for example in the new system of whistleblowers, which can act even there is no apparent interest.

Cette bibliographie indicative vise des :

• ouvrages généraux

 

• ouvrages abordant la Régulation et la Compliance bancaire et financière à l'occasion d'un autre sujet principalement traité

 

• sites pertinents pour l'étude du Droit de la Régulation bancaire et financière

 

• ouvrages et articles portant spécifiquement sur la Régulation et la Compliance bancaire et financière

 

► Full Reference: O. Douvreleur,  "Compliance and Judge ruling only on points of Law", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, series "Compliance & Regulation", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, to be published. 

___

► Article Summary (done by the Journal of Regulation): Compliance maintains with the judge complex relations, and even more with the judge ruling only on points of Law  (in France, the Court de Cassation in the judicial order, the one who, in principle, does not know the facts that he leaves to the sovereign appreciation of the judges ruling on the substance of the disputes. At first glance, compliance is a technique internalised in companies and the place occupied by negotiated justice techniques leave little room for intervention by the judge ruling only on points of Law

However, his role is intended to develop, in particular with regard to the duty of vigilance or in the articulation between the different branches of Law when compliance meets Labor Law, or even in the adjustment between American Law and the other legal systems, especially French legal system. The way in which the principle of Proportionality will take place in Compliance Law is also a major issue for the judge ruling only on points of Law.

____

 

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

 

________

 

 

 

🌐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.), 📘Compliance Probation system, 2027

 

• 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 Relation 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 ♦️ How International Arbitration can reinforce 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

________

 

 

🌐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 : 💬 Read the interview 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

________

 

🌐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

 

________