Compliance and Regulation Law bilingual Dictionnary

In principle, the very mechanism of the market is governed by freedom, the freedoms of the agents themselves - the freedom to undertake and contract - and the competitive freedom that marks the market itself, the convergence of these freedoms allowing the self-regulated functioning of The "market law", namely the massive encounter of offers and demands that generates the right price ("fair price").
But in the case of financial markets, which are regulated markets, "market abuses" are sanctioned at the very heart of regulation. Indeed, the regulation of the financial markets presupposes that the information is distributed there for the benefit of investors, or even other stakeholders, possibly information not exclusively financial. This integrity of the financial markets which, beyond the integrity of information, must achieve transparency, justifies that information is fully and equally shared. That is why those who hold or must hold information that is not shared by others (privileged information) must not use it in the market until they have made it public. Similarly, they should not send bad information to the market. Neither should they manipulate stock market prices.
These sanctions were essentially conceived by the American financial theory, concretized by the American courts, then taken back in Europe. To the extent that they sanction both reproachable behavior and constitute a public policy instrument of direction and protection of markets, the question of cumulation of criminal law and administrative repressive law can only be posed with difficulty in Europe.
Thesaurus : Soft Law
► Référence complète : Agence française anticorruption (AFA), Guide du contrôle comptable anticorruption, 2022.
____
____
📧 Lire le commentaire fait par Marie-Anne Frison-Roche de ce guide.
_______
Thesaurus : Doctrine
Compliance and Regulation Law bilingual Dictionnary

A Central Bank is for the Law a rather mysterious object.
Despite what some competition authorities have said, it is not an ordinary bank. It is at the root of monetary creation and its primary mission is to fight against inflation, contributing more or less directly and in a more or less independent way according to political and legal systems to the economic policy pursued by governments.
Thus, while central banks all have constitutional status which guarantees autonomy, they have a more limited mission in Europe than in the United States. This is even more evident since monetary cre - ation has been transferred to the European Central Bank (ECB), which makes it even more necessary to interpret what the Central Bank can do, Reminded the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in 2015 of the ECB's non-conventional monetary policy programs.
The central bankers either directly by a department or indirectly by an independent administrative authority (IAA) backed by them and who, although independent, have no legal personality with regard to them ( for example in the French system concerning the " Autorité de contrôle prudentiel et de resolution - ACPR) exercises regulatory and supervisory powers over the banking and insurance sectors.
As such, they are regulators. When en Europe the power to create money has been taken away from them, passing from the Member States to the European Central Bank (ECB) through the Euro Zone, it is this regulatory and supervisory power which remains their own, their mission being only to participate in the European collective mechanism.
But for exercising its regulatory and supervisory role, the central bankers have considerable powers, including approval, sanction and, since 2013 and 2014, resolution. But in this respect it must be considered that, in particular with regard to the European Convention on Human Rights, central bankers are like courts and in the exercise of numerous powers, procedural guarantees must be conferred on operators who are the object of those powers.
Compliance and Regulation Law bilingual Dictionnary

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.
Thesaurus : Doctrine
Thesaurus
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.
Thesaurus : Doctrine
► Référence complète : C. Barreau, "L’éducation à la concurrence des monopoleurs publics par la sanction des abus « d’infrastructures essentielles » ", in O. Serra (dir.), Des restrictions de concurrence à la libéralisation des marchés, Presses Universitaires de Toulouse Capitole, 2025, pp.379-403.
____
________
Compliance and Regulation Law bilingual Dictionnary

"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".
Thesaurus : Doctrine
Référence complète : Gibert, M., Faire la morale aux robots. Une introduction à l'éthique des algorithmes, Flammarion, 2021, 168 p.
Thesaurus : Doctrine

Référence complète : Terré, F., Concurrence et proportionnalité, in Parléani, G. (coord.), Mélanges en l'honneur du Professeur Claude Lucas de Leyssac, LexisNexis, novembre 2018, pp.467-471.
____
Lire une présentation générale des Mélanges dans lesquels l'article a été publié.
____
Thesaurus : Doctrine
Référence complète : Boursier, M.-E., L’irrésistible ascension du whistleblowing en droit financier s’étend aux abus de marché, Bulletin Joly Bourse, 1ier septembre 2016.
Les étudiants de Sciences po peuvent lire l'article en accédant au dossier "MAFR - Régulation"
Compliance and Regulation Law bilingual Dictionnary

The procedural guarantees enjoyed by a person whose situation may be affected by a forthcoming judgment are mainly the right of action, the rights of defense and the benefit of the adversarial principle.
The rights of the defense have constitutional value and constitute human rights, benefiting everyone, including legal persons. The mission of positive Law is to give effect to them in good time, that is to say from the moment of the investigation or custody, which is manifested for example by the right to the assistance of a lawyer or the right to remain silent or the right to lie. Thus the rights of the defense are not intended to help the manifestation of the truth, do not help the judge or the effectiveness of repression - which is what the principle of adversarial law does - they are pure rights, subjective for the benefit of people, including even especially people who may be perfectly guilty, and seriously guilty.
The rights of the defense are therefore an anthology of prerogatives which are offered to the person implicated or likely to be or likely to be affected. It does not matter if it possibly affects the efficiency. These are human rights. This is why their most natural holder is the person prosecuted in criminal proceedings or facing a system of repression. This is why the triggering of the power of a tribunal or a judge offers them in a consubstantial way to the one who is by this sole fact - and legitimately - threatened by this legitimate violence (one of the definitions of the State ).
The rights of the defense therefore begin even before the trial because the "useful time" begins from the investigation phase, from the searches, even from the controls, and continues on the occasion of appeals against the decision adversely affecting the decision. The legal action being a means of being a party, that is to say of making arguments in its favor, and therefore of defending its case, shows that the plaintiff in the proceedings also holds legal defense rights since he is not only plaintiff in the proceedings but he also plaintiff and defendant to the allegations which are exchanged during the procedure: he alleged to the allegation of his opponent is not correct.
They take many forms and do not need to be expressly provided for in texts, since they are principled and constitutionally benefit from a broad interpretation (ad favorem interpretation). This is the right to be a party (for example the right of intervention, the right of action - which some distinguish from the rights of the defense - the right to be questioned, such as the right to be brought into question (or examination), right to be assisted by a lawyer, right to remain silent, right not to incriminate oneself, right of access to the file, right to intervene in the debate (the rights of the defense thus crossing the adversarial principle), right to appeal, etc.
It is essential to qualify an organ as a tribunal because this triggers for the benefit of the person concerned the procedural guarantees, including the rights of the defense, which on the basis of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights man was made about the Regulators yet formally organized in Independent Administrative Authorities (AAI). This contributed to the general movement of jurisdictionalization of Regulation.
Compliance and Regulation Law bilingual Dictionnary

Legally, the State is a public law subject defined by territory, people and institutions. It acts in the international space and emits norms. Politically, it has the legitimacy required to express the will of the social body and to exercise the violence of which it deprives the other subjects of law. It is often recognizable by its power: its use of public force, its budgetary power, its jurisdictional power. These three powers, declining or being challenged by private, international and more satisfying mechanisms, some predicted the disappearance of the State, to deplore it or to dance on its corpse.
With such a background, in current theories of Regulation, primarily constructed by economic thought and at first sight one might say that the State is above all the enemy. And this for two main reasons. The first is theoretical and of a negative nature. The advocates of the theory of regulation deny the State the political qualities set out above. The State would not be a "person" but rather a group of individuals, civil servants, elected officials and other concrete human beings, expressing nothing but their particular interests, coming into conflict with other interests, and using their powers to serve the former rather than the latter as everyone else. The Regulation theory, adjoining the theory of the agency, is then aimed at controlling public agents and elected representatives in whom there is no reason to trust a priori.
The second reason is practical and positive. The State would not be a "person" but an organization. Here we find the same perspective as for the concept of enterprise, which classical lawyers conceive as a person or a group of people, while economists who conceive of the world through the market represent it as an organization. The state as an organization should be "efficient" or even "optimal". It is then the pragmatic function of the Regulation Law. When it is governed by traditional law, entangled by that it would be an almost religious illusions of the general interest, or even the social contract, it is suboptimal. The Regulation purpose is about making it more effective.
To this end, as an organization, the State is divided into independent regulatory agencies or independent administrative authorities that manage the subjects as close as possible, which is fortunate in reducing the asymmetry of information and in reviving trust in a direct link. The unitary, distant and arrogant State is abandoned for a flexible and pragmatic conception of a strategic state (without capital ...) that would finally have understood that it is an organization like any other ...
Competition law adopts this conception of the State, which it posed from the beginning that it was an economic operator like any other. This is how this conception which would be more "neutral" of the world is often presented.
Successive crises, whether sanitary or financial, have produced a pendulum effect.
Now, the notions of general interest or common goods are credited of an autonomous value, and the necessity of surpassing immediate interests and of finding persons to bear superior interests or to take charge of the interests of others, even a non-immediate one, emerged.
Thus, the State or the public authority, reappears in the globalization. The Compliance Law or the Corporal Social Responsibility of the crucial companies are converging towards a consideration of the State, which can not be reduced to a pure and simple organization receptacle of externalities.
Dec. 16, 2026
Editorial responsibilities : Direction of the collection "Regulations & Compliance", JoRC & Dalloz

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
🌐subscribe to the VideoNews MAFR Surplomb
🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Law & Art
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance et Contrat ("Compliance and Contract"), coll."Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Editions Lefebvre-Dalloz, to be published.
____
📘 At the same time, a book in English, Compliance and Contracts, is published in the collection copublished by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the Editions Lefebre-Bruylant.
____
🧮the book follows the cycle of colloquia organised by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and its Universities partners in 2026
____
📚this volume is one of a series of books devoted to Compliance in this collection.
► read the presentations of the other books:
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Le système probatoire de la Compliance, 2027
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕L'obligation de compliance 2025
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche & M. Boissavy (eds.), 📕Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne - CJIP - CRPC, 2024
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕La juridictionnalisation de Compliance, 2023
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, 2022
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Les outils de la Compliance, 2021
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Pour une Europe de la Compliance, 2019
🕴️N. Borga, 🕴️J.-Cl. Marin and 🕴️J.-Ch. Roda (eds.), 📕Compliance : l'Entreprise, le Régulateur et le Juge, 2018
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Régulation, Supervision, Compliance, 2017
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Internet, espace d'interrégulation, 2016
📚see the global presentation of all the books of the collection.
___
► General presentation of this book: The book, published in 2025 int the same series "Regulations & Compliance" series, demonstrates that the Obligation of Compliance—which falls upon crucial operators and those concerned with the future of systems and the present and future individuals involved in them—derives from laws and regulations, and is upheld by these operators themselves, regulators and judges. The role played by contracts is discussed therein. This book specifically examines the role that contracts play and will play in the conception, development and implementation of Compliance Law.
This aspect is underestimated because Compliance Law is often analysed through the prism of laws and regulations designed to achieve Monumental Goals set by states and public authorities, to the realisation of which systemic economic operations contribute through compliance tools, rather than through the actors themselves. When they do act, this is referred to outside the realm of Law, generally to Ethics. However, the Contract, the binding legal instrument par excellence, will play an increasingly significant role within global and interconnected compliance systems.
In the European construction of Compliance Law, which places human beings at the heart of efforts to ensure the sustainability of systems, the Contract serves not only as the means by which the entity fulfils its legal obligations, forges relationships with stakeholders and implements the necessary innovations, but also as the means by which it exercises its autonomy to contribute to the realisation of the systemic ambitions in question.
To describe and anticipate the practice and rules that link Compliance Law and Contracts, the book first examines how this new branch of Law, insofar as it draws on the political ideas of the Social Contract, renews Contract Law by embedding it within the strategy of economic operators, a task made all the easier for them as they have built value chains through contracts. These are ‘regulatory contracts’. This demonstrates that Public Law Contracts exemplify the incorporation by General Contract Law of the overarching perspective of compliance, normatively anchored in the Monumental Goals (Title I).
That explained, the book examines how General Contract Law interfaces with the techniques and objectives of Compliance Law. Whether through mandatory requirements, incentives or support, Compliance Law plays a role in contracts, helping to shape them in part, whether they relate to regulated or unregulated activities, with the points of contact with the principle of liberalism – and the limits to it – being determined by the courts. Conversely, however, General Contract Law contributes to Compliance Law and will do so increasingly. This applies equally to the stages of formation, execution, and sanctions, which may take the form of consolidations (Title II).
In practical terms, the Contract itself serves as a Compliance Tol. As such, the company may choose to outsource the compliance function, which it is free to do provided it remains accountable for its performance to the legislator and the persons concerned: this is the concept of the ‘Compliance Contract’, which appears as a specific contract. Furthermore, compliance can be incorporated into multiple contracts—contractual arrangements through which the contracting parties establish one or more obligations that will facilitate or enhance their legal obligations. In doing so, legal entities exercise their freedom, as permitted by general law, and this is also recognised by the Regulator, Supervisor and/or Judge in light of the normative Monumental Goals of Compliance Law (Title III).
Precisely, a new field of ‘contractual compliance litigation’ is emerging. The primary topic here is to examine contractual judicial disputes in which an element of Compliance Law features in the proceedings. Indeed, a dispute concerning a claim for mandatory execution, termination or contractual liability may involve, in the claim itself or in an procedural exception or defence raised, an element of compliance law, ranging from an allegation of lack of jurisdiction to a request for the court to take into account a systemic teological norm that the contract judge should consider. Secondly, in certain emerging systemic compliance litigation, because the role of the judge is transformed and the procedure must be adapted, the contract appears as a particularly suitable tool, either as a ‘procedural framework’ through the contractualisation of the whole, or as a technique used in the strict sense, its ex ante nature allowing, in disputes concerning the future, the development of new adequate techniques (Title IV).
____
► First presentation of the Table of Content :
____
REPORTING ON CONTRACTUAL PRACTICES WITHIN THE COMPLIANCE SYSTEM AND ENHANCING ITS EFFECTIVENESS AND HUMANITY COMPTE DES PRATIQUES CONTRACTUELLES DANS LE SYSTEME DE COMPLIANCE ET ACCROITRE L'EFFICACITE ET L'HUMANISME DE CELUI-CI
(REPORTING ON CONTRACTUAL PRACTICES WITHIN THE COMPLIANCE SYSTEM AND ENHANCING ITS EFFECTIVENESS AND HUMANITY)
♦️ sss, par 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
TITRE I.
CONTRAT SOCIAL, DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE ET STRATEGIE DES OPERATEURS ECONOMIQUES
CHAPITRE I : CONTRAT SOCIAL ET DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE
Section 1 ♦️ Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, guide d'action pour des opérateurs économiques au service d'une politique globale, par 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
Section 2 ♦️ sss, par 🕴️René Sève
CHAPITRE II : AMBITIONS POITIQUES ET STRATEGIES D'ENTREPRISE DANS L'ORGANISATION CONTRACTUELLE DES CHAINES DE VALEUR
Section 1 ♦️ sss
Section 2 ♦️ sss, par
CHAPITRE III : LES CONTRATS PUBLICS, PARANGONS DE L'ACCUEILS DES AMBITIONS POLITIQUES DANS LES STRATEGIES ET L'ALLIANCE DES INSTITUTIONS
Section 1 ♦️ sss
Section 2 ♦️ sss, par
TITRE II.
LE DROIT COMMUN DES CONTRATS CONFRONTE AU DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE
CHAPITRE I : DISTINGUER LE CONTRACTUEL DE CE QUI S'EN RAPPROCHE DANS LE SYSTEM DE COMPLIANCE
Section 1 ♦️ La ronde des engagements et des contrats dans le droit de la compliance e, par 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
Section 2 ♦️ sss,
CHAPITRE II : L'EMPRISE DU DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE SUR LE DROIT COMMUN DE DES CONTRATS
Section 1 ♦️ sss
Section 2 ♦️ sss,
CHAPITRE III : L'APPORT DU DROIT COMMUN DES CONTRATS AU DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE
Section 1 ♦️ sss
Section 2 ♦️ sss, par
TITRE III.
CONTRAT DE COMPLIANCE, CLAUSES DE COMPLIANCE
CHAPITRE I : LE "CONTRAT DE COMPLIANCE"
Section 1 ♦️ sss
Section 2 ♦️ sss,
CHAPITRE II : LES CLAUSES DE COMPLIANCE
Section 1 ♦️ sss
Section 2 ♦️ sss, par
TITRE IV.
LE CONTENTIEUX CONTRACTUEL IMPLIQUANT LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE
CHAPITRE I : CE
Section 1 ♦️ sss
Section 2 ♦️ sss,
CHAPITRE II : CE
Section 1 ♦️ sss
Section 2 ♦️ sss, par
________
June 12, 2026
Conferences

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter en vidéo MAFR Surplomb
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art
____
► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "La définition juridique du contrat de compliance", in Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) ele Centre de recherche sur la Justice et le Réglement des conflits (CRJ) et le Centre de recherche en économie et droit (CRED) de l'Université Panthéon-Assas (Paris II), Le "Contrat de compliance", Amphithéatre Paris II - 82 rue Notre Dame des Champs, 12 juin 2026.
____
🧮consulter le programme complet de la manifestation
____
____
🚧Lire le document de travail bilingue sur la base duquel cette conférence est bâti
____
📝Cette conférence sera la base d'une contribution dans l'ouvrage, 📕Compliance et Contrat,
à paraître dans la collection 📚Régulations & Compliance, ouvrage coédité par le Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Lefebvre-Dalloz.
____
► Présentation de cette conférence : La conférence est construite en trois temps.
Dans une première partie, le propos vise à rendre compte de la réalité du "contrat de compliance", qui peut se définir comme la décision prise par une entité assujettie à une "obligation de compliance" (le plus souvent une entreprise, mais il faut s'agir aussi d'une organisation publique) de confier à un tiers la réalisaion de cette obligation à un tiers. Cela ne diminue pas l'obligation de l'entité de rendre des comptes sur la structure de compliance, l'aptitude de celle-ci à produire les effets attendus, notamment les comportements qui vont contribuer à atteindre les buts monumentaux systémiques pour l'obtention desquels les corpus de compliance ont été adoptés. Cette externalisation est licite, sa forme contractuelle relève du droit des contrats et du principe de l'autonomie de la volont.
Même si l'on considère que du fait que l'objet du contrat est donc la Compliance elle-même, et qu'il s'agirati d'un "contrat systémique", comme le contentieux de la compliance est un "contentieux systémique, la nature première est bien une relation bilatérale entre un client et un technicien (souvent assujeti à des règles professionnells et déontologies).
En effet,, conséquences juridiques, de cette pratique de "contrats de compliance", parce que c'est le système de compliance qui est ainsi servi, d'une part des "clauses réglementaires" vont s'insérer, d'autres seront effacées ("réputées non-écrites"). La liberté contactuelle demeure pourtant le principe.
Dans l'art contractuel, il sera adéquat pour les contractants de viser cette contribution aux Buts Monumentaux qui constituent la norme juridique du système de compliance, ne serait-ce que pour guider le juge du contrat qui pourra être saisi en cas de litige, car l'interprétation de la volonté des parties devra s'opérer d'une façon téléologique.
Dans une deuxième partie, est analysée l'articulation entre ce "contrat de compliance" et les multiples "clauses de compliance". Il ne faut certes pas confondre les deux, puisqu'indépendamment de ces contrats très spécifiques par lesquels les différentes techniques de compliance sont confiées, dans leur confection et dans leur gestion, à des tiers, qui en deviennent ainsi les experts, sont par ailleurs insérées dans de multiples contrats (de vente, de distribution, de fabrication, de service, etc.), des clauses qui visent, parmi de multiples clauses ayant un autre objet, à insérer le souci de compliance dans le contrat.
Mais en premier lieu, dans le Contrat de compliance, il y a de multiples claues qui lui sont spécifiques et qui viennent souvent des corpus de compliance puisque la Compliance est l'objet même du contrat: il est donc logique que, par un "effet de transparence" le corps légal entre dans le contrat.
En second lieu et d'une façon plus remarquable, il existe dans ces divers contrats des clauses qui prévoit le déclenchement d'un "contrat de compliance". Par exemple lorsqu'une clause d'audit est articulée à un évènement et que la stipulation prévoit qu'un contrat sera alors passé avec telle ou telle structure d'expertise, ce qui est un contrat de compliance. L'articulation entre les deux peut donner à un des contractants un contrôle sur l'autre, si l'expert lui est proche. Si les articulations entre contrats de compliance et clauses de compliance l'on peut aboutir au retour de l'intégration verticale. Le Droit de la concurrence peut être légitime à regarder cela.
Apparaît qu'après avoir distinguer Contrat de compliance et clauses de compliance, puis les avoir articulé, l'on peut abourir à une stratégie contractuelle de compliance qui est légitime et efficace, dès l'instant qu'elle contribue à la concrétisation des Buts Monumentaux posés par les Autorités politiques et publiques.
En effet, dès l'instant que l'on distingue la "conformité", qui ne vise l'opérateur que pour le contraindre à obéir aveuglement et mécaniquement à toutes les réglementations qui lui sont applicables, pour se référer à ce qu'est le Droit de la compliance qui a pour norme les Buts systémiques monumentaux, cette stratégie contractuelle est essentielle.
La troisième partie vise à développer la porté de ce Contrat de compliance.
La première portée est à l'égard du système de compliance, dont il est une partie, le contrat ayant pour effet heureux d'accroître la contribution de l'opérateur à la réalisation des Buts Monumentaux systémiques (faire en sorte que les systèmes - bancaire, financier, de transport, énergétituq, climatique, numérique, etc.- ne s'effrondrent pas et qu'ils ne broyent pas les êtres humains mais qu'ils bénéficient aux êtres humains qui y sont impliqués de force ou de gré).
Pour cela, le contrat doit permettre, au besoin en s'appuyant sur des stipulations expresses, à l'opérateur de montrer sa crébilité à contribuer à la réalisation de ces Buts Monumentaux. Des trajectoires fiables, des structures crédibles doivent être établies. Lorsque la réalisation technique est externalisé, cette obligation probatoire peut être fragilisée. En compensatoion, cela peut prendre dans le Contrat de compliance la forme de stipulations relatives à des informations techniques portables, par de l'aide disponible dans le mécanisme de reddition des comptes, voire en cas de procès.
La deuxième portée est celle à l'égard des contractants eux-même, qui ajustent leurs volontés et qui sont contraints avant tout par cette "petite loi". Cette perspective est étonnamment peu développée en pratique, sans doute parce qu'en Droit l'on réfléchit à la Compliance l'on se référence à la "réglementation" et au rapport vertical d'obétissance qu'elle engendre sur l'opérateur.
La troisième portée est celle à l'égard des tiers que sont les parties parties. Celles-ci sont servies par les Contrats de compliance, parce qu'elles sont insérées dans le système de compliance et que la transparence entre ce système et les Contrats de compliance les systèmes. En effet et plus techniquement, ce Contrat spécifique leur offre en addition non seulement un assujetti (l'entreprise, l'organisation publique, l'Etat), mais encore le débiteur contractuel. Vis-à-vis de celui-ci, les parties prenantes peuvent faire valoir des droits.
Mais les contrats eux-mêmes, parce qu'ils sont opposables aux tiers, peuvent anticiper ce rapports par rapport aux tiers, non seulement les concurrents de l'entité assujettie à l'Obligation de compliance, mais encore son propre rapport aux parties prenantes, voire son rapport aux Autorités publiques. En effet, l'objet (et l'effet) du Contrat de compliance est de produire, de construire, de l'information qui intéresse tout le monde. Le résultat en est un "trésor probatoire". Une question majeure est de déterminer comment et si ce trésor peut rester dans le cercle des contractants ou pas.
En effet, la quatrième portée est celle à l'égard des autorités publiques. Celles-ci, en tant qu'elles "portent" le système de compliance, estiment à la fois que le Contrat de compliance est légitime, qu'il est l'un des moyens les plus efficaces de rendre effectives, efficaces et efficientes les réglementations, mais elles voudraient aussi bénéficient du résultat de l'exécution d'un tel contrat : l'information systémique qui en résulte. Les contractants ne partagent pas toujours cette conception, mais le Contrat de compliance n'est pas un mode d'application "obéissante" des réglementations. C'est le juge qui va certainement appréhender cette question de principe, qui renvoie à la définition même du Droit de la compliance.
Cela nous mène à la cinquième portée, qui est celle à l'égard du juge. Or, plusieurs juges ont vocation à en connaître. Le juge du contrat, le juge de la concurrence, le juge des différentes systèmes dont la durabilité est ainsi préservée, le juge spécialisé en droit de la vigilance (pointe avancée du Droit de la compliance).
La question du "juge naturel" a été examinée lors du colloque du 29 mai 2026 sur : Le contentieux contractuel impliquant la Compliance : aspects procéduraux et juridictionnels. Le juge du contrat (juge civil ou commercial) aura tendance à se référer avant tout au contrat. C'est aussi pour cela que le contrat de compliance gagnera à se référer dans ses stipulations dans ses rapports avec le système de compliance, pour que cela ne soit pas les Autorités de celui-ci qui le fassent d'une façon "autoritaire".
Dans l'appréhension du Contrat de compliance, comme cela fût souligné en 2022, dans l'interprétation qu'il donne du contrat, le juge a vocation à articuler la volonté des parties avec un raisonnement téléologique, c'est-à-dire à poser que les parties ont voulu servir la finalité de l'expertise ainsi sollicitée et développée (pour l'opérateur et in fine pour les parties prenantes et pour le système lui-même).
En posant cette convergence, le juge donne plein effet au Contrat de compliance. Plutôt que de poser, comme on le fait si souvent lorsqu'on raisonne en terme de "conformité", dans un rapport heurté entre la liberté contractuelle et l"ordre public (la conformité étant au service c'un ordre public qui serait contre le contrat).
Il faut poser comme principe que la liberté contractuelle, l'autonomie de la volonté et le marché concurrentiel de l'expertise de compliance sont les voies efficiente du développement du système de compliance qui préservera les système interconnectés et protègera les êtres humains qui y sont impliqués.
____
⛏️Aller plus loin :
🕴🏻🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Contrat de compliance, clauses de compliance, 2022
🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, ⚙️Compliance et Contrat,
________
June 10, 2026
Thesaurus : Doctrine
► Référence complète : E da Allada. (dir.), Devoir de vigilance. Quelles perspectives africaines ?, Lefebvre-Dalloz, coll. "Thèmes & Commentaires, 2026, sous presse.
____
►Voir notamment la présentation des contributions :
June 3, 2026
Thesaurus : 01. Conseil constitutionnel
► Référence complète : Conseil constitutionnel, déc. n°25-1184 QPC, 6 mars 2026, Conseil national des barreaux et autres
[Expérimentation d’une contribution pour la justice économique due pour chaque instance devant le tribunal des activités économiques]
____
________
May 31, 2026
Questions of Law
May 29, 2026
Conferences

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter en vidéo MAFR Surplomb
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art
____
► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le maniement du temps dans le contentieux contractuel impliquant la Compliance : de l’urgence au temps long", in Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Université Jean Moulin - Lyon 3 (,..), Le contentieux contractuel impliquant la Compliance : aspects procéduraux et juridictionnels, Faculté de droit, Lyon, 29 mai 2026.
____
🧮consulter le programme complet de la manifestation
____
____
🚧Lire le document de travail bilingue sur la base duquel cette conférence est bâti
____
Lire la présentation des deux autres interventions dans ce colloque :
🎥L'émergence du contentieux contractuel impliquant la Compliance par la convergence des matières
🎥Le jugement adéquat dans le contentieux contractuel impliquant la Compliance et son exécution efficace
____
📝Cette conférence sera la base d'une contribution dans l'ouvrage, 📕Compliance et Contrat,
à paraître dans la collection 📚Régulations & Compliance, ouvrage coédité par le Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Lefebvre-Dalloz.
____
► Présentation de cette conférence :
⛏️Aller plus loin :
🕴🏻J.-M. Coulon et 🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche (codir.), Le temps dans la procédure ⚙️Compliance et Contrat, 19966
🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, ⚙️Compliance et Contrat,
________
May 29, 2026
Editorial responsibilities : Direction of the collection Compliance & Regulation, JoRC and Bruylant

🌐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 (ed.), Compliance Obligation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, "Compliance & Regulation" Serie, 2026, 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 Lefebvre-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:
🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Evidential System, 2027
🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance and Contract, 2027
🕴️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 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 substantial Introduction, putting the different sort of obligations of compliance in legal categories for showing that companies must build structures of compliance (obligation of result) and act to contribute with states and stakeholders to reach Monumental Goals (obligation of means).
The first part is devoted to the definition of the Compliance Obligation.
The second part presents the articulation of Compliance obligation with the other branchs of Law, because the specific obligation is built by Compliance Law, as new substantial branch of Law but also by many other branchs of Law.
The third part develops the pratical means established to obtained the Compliance Obligation to be effective, efficace and efficient.
The fourth part takes the Obligation of Vigilance as an illustration of all these considerations and the discussion about the future of this sparehead fo the Compliance Obligation .
The fifth part refers to the place and the role of the judges, natural characters for any obligation.
____
ANCHORING THE SO DIVERSE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATIONS IN THEIR NATURE, REGIMES AND FORCE TO BRING OUT THE VERY UNITY OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION, MAKING IT COMPREHENSIBLE AND PRACTICABLE
🔹 Compliance Obligation: building a compliance structure that produces credible results withe regard to the Monumentals Goals targeted by the Legislator, 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
Section 5 🔹 The definition of the Compliance Obligation in Cybersecurity, by 🕴️Michel Séjean
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 applications in Europe, by 🕴️Louis d'Avout
TITLE II.
ARTICULATING THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION WITH OTHER BRANCHES OF LAW
Section 1 🔹 Tax Law and Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Daniel Gutmann
Section 2 🔹 General Procedural Law, prototype of the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
Section 3 🔹 Corporate and Financial Markets Law facing the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Anne-Valérie Le Fur
Section 4 🔹 Transformation of Governance and Vigilance Obligation, by 🕴️Véronique Magnier
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 & 🕴️Alice Briegleb
Section 9 🔹 Environmental an Climatic Dimensions of the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Marta Torre-Schaub
Section 10 🔹 Judge of Insolvency Law and Compliance Obligations, by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Barbièri
TITLE III.
COMPLIANCE: GIVE AND TAKE THE MEANS TO OBLIGE
CHAPTER I: COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION: THE CONVERGENCE OF SOURCES
Section 1 🔹 Compliance Obligation upon Obligation works, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
Section 2 🔹 Conformity technologies to meet Compliance Law requirements. Some examples in Digital Law, by 🕴️Emmanuel Netter
Section 3 🔹 Legal Constraint and Company Strategies in Compliance matters, by 🕴️Jean-Philippe Denis & 🕴️Nathalie Fabbe-Coste
Section 4 🔹 Opposition and convergence of American and European legal systems in Compliance Rules and Systems, by 🕴️Raphaël Gauvain & 🕴️Blanche Balian
Section 5 🔹 In Compliance Law, the legal consequences for Entreprises of their Commitments and Undertakings, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
CHAPTER II: INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN SUPPORT OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION
Section 1 🔹 How International Arbitration can reinforce the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Laurent Aynès
Section 2 🔹 Arbitration consideration of Compliance Obligation for a Sustainable Arbitration Place, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
Section 3 🔹 The Arbitral Tribunal's Award in Kind, in support of the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Eduardo Silva Romero
Section 4 🔹 The use of International Arbitration to reinforce the Compliance Obligation: the example of the construction sector, by 🕴️Christophe Lapp
Section 5 🔹 The Arbitrator, Judge, Supervisor, Support, by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Racine
TITLE IV.
VIGILANCE, SPEARHEAD OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION
Section 1 🔹 Vigilance Obligation, Spearheard and Total Share of the Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
CHAPTER I: INTENSITIES OF THE VIGILANCE OBLIGATION, SPEARHEAD OF THE COMPLIANCE SYSTEM
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 Digital Operators, by 🕴️Grégoire Loiseau
Section 4 🔹 Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Energy Operators, by 🕴️Marie Lamoureux
CHAPTER II: GENERAL EVOLUTION OF THE VIGILANCE OBLIGATION
Section 1 🔹 Rethinking the Concept of Civil Liability in the light of the Duty of Vigilance, Spearhead of Compliance, by 🕴️Mustapha Mekki
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
Section 4 🔹 Compliance, Vigilance and Civil Liability: put in order and keep the Reason, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
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 🔹 The Judge required for an Effective Compliance Obligation, by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
________
CONCLUSION
THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION: A BURDEN BORNE BY SYSTEMIC COMPANIES GIVING LIFE TO COMPLIANCE LAW
(conclusion and key points of the books, free access)
May 29, 2026
Publications

🌐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, "General Procedural Law, prototype of the Compliance Obligation", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Obligation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, "Compliance & Regulation" Serie, 2026, forthcoming.
____
📝read the article
____
____
📘read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Obligation, in which this article is published
____
► Summary of this article: At first glance, General Procedural Law seems to be the area the least concerned by the Compliance Obligation, because if the person is obliged by it, mainly large companies, it is precisely, thanks to this Ex Ante, in order to never to have to deal with proceedings, these path that leads to the Judge, that Ex Post figure that in return for the weight of the compliance obligation they have been promised they will never see: any prospect of proceedings would be seeming to signify the very failure of the Compliance Obligation (I).
But not only are the legal rules attached to the Procedure necessary because the Judge is involved, and increasingly so, in compliance mechanisms, but they are also rules of General Procedural Law and not a juxtaposition of civil procedure, criminal procedure, administrative procedure, etc., because the Compliance Obligation itself is not confined either to civil procedure or to criminal procedure, to administrative procedure, etc., which in practice gives primacy to what brings them all together: General Procedural Law (II).
In addition to what might be called the "negative" presence of General Procedural Law, there is also a positive reason, because General Procedural Law is the prototype for "Systemic Compliance Litigation", and in particular for the most advanced aspect of this, namely the duty of vigilance (III). In particular, it governs the actions that can be brought before the Courts (IV), and the principles around which proceedings are conducted, with an increased opposition between the adversarial principle, which marries the Compliance Obligation, since both reflect the principle of Information, and the rights of the defence, which do not necessarily serve them, a clash that will pose a procedural difficulty in principle (V).
Finally, and this "prototype" status is even more justified, because Compliance Law has given companies jurisdiction over the way in which they implement their legal Compliance Obligations, it is by respecting and relying on the principles of General Procedural Law that this must be done, in particular through not only sanctions but also internal investigations (VI).
________
May 29, 2026
Publications

🌐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, Arbitration consideration of Compliance Obligation for a sustainable Arbitration Place", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Obligation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, "Compliance & Regulation" Serie, 2026, forthcoming.
____
📝read the article
____
📘read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Obligation, in which this article is published
____
► Summary of this article: The first part of this study assesses the evolving relationship between Arbitration Law and Compliance Law, which depends on the very definition of the Compliance Obligation (I). Indeed, these relations have been negative for as long as Compliance has been seen solely in terms of "conformity", i.e. obeying the rules or being punished. These relationships are undergoing a metamorphosis, because the Compliance Obligation refers to a positive and dynamic definition, anchored in the Monumental Goals that companies anchor in the contracts that structure their value chains.
Based on this development, the second part of the study aims to establish the techniques of Arbitration and the office of the arbitrator to increase the systemic efficiency of the Compliance Obligation, thereby strengthening the attractiveness of the Place (II). First and foremost, it is a question of culture: the culture of Compliance must permeate the world of Arbitration, and vice versa. To achieve this, it is advisable to take advantage of the fact that in Compliance Law the distinction between Public and Private Law is less significant, while the concern for the long term of contractually forged structural relationships is essential.
To encourage such a movement to deploy the Compliance Obligation, promoting the strengthening of a Sustainable Arbitration Place (III), the first tool is the contract. Since contracts structure value chains and enable companies to fulfill their legal Compliance Obligation but also to add their own will to it, stipulations or offers relating to Arbitration should be included in them. In addition, the adoption of non-binding texts can set out a guiding principle to ensure that concern for the Monumental Goals is appropriate in order the Compliance Obligation to be taken into account by Arbitrators.
________
May 29, 2026
Conferences

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter en vidéo MAFR Surplomb
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art
____
► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "L'émergence du contentieux contractuel impliquant la Compliance par la convergence des matières", in Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Université Jean Moulin - Lyon 3 (,..), Le contentieux contractuel impliquant la Compliance : aspects procéduraux et juridictionnels, Faculté de droit, Lyon, 29 mai 2026.
____
🧮consulter le programme complet de la manifestation
____
____
🚧Lire le document de travail bilingue sur la base duquel cette conférence est bâti
____
Lire la présentation des deux autres interventions dans ce colloque :
🎥Le maniement du temps dans le contentieux contractuel impliquant la Compliance : de l’urgence au temps long
🎥Le jugement adéquat dans le contentieux contractuel impliquant la Compliance et son exécution efficace
____
🌐Lire le compte-rendu de la conférence et de la manifestation sur LinkedIn
____
📝Cette conférence sera la base d'une contribution dans l'ouvrage, 📕Compliance et Contrat,
à paraître dans la collection 📚Régulations & Compliance, ouvrage coédité par le Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Lefebvre-Dalloz.
____
► Présentation de cette conférence introductive du colloque : S'insérant dans un cycle de colloques sur Compliance et Contrat, ce colloque porte sur une hypothèse procédurale et juridictionnelle précise : celle d'un contentieux contractuel qui est porté devant le "juge du contrat", qu'il soit civil ou commercial, devant lequel est alléguée une obligation de compliance. Quels effets procéduraux et juridictionnels cela produit-il ?
⛏️Aller plus loin :
🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche (codir.), ⚙️Compliance et Contrat, 2026
🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Obligation de Compliance : construire une structure de compliance produisant des effets crédibles au regard des Buts Monumentaux visés par le Législateur, in 🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📕L'obligation de compliance, 2025
De nature introductive, ce premier développement vise à décrive la façon dont la question systémique de la compliance doit entrer dans un litige contractuel (la question de la transformation de principe que cela entre sur ce litige est traité par Thibault Goujon-Béthan, qui en montre les spécificités que cela produit.
____
Après avoir rappelé en premier lieu ce qu'est l'obligation de compliance à laquelle certaines organisations sont assujetties et en second lieu souligné le mouvement de juridictionnalisation de la compliance, la conférence décrit tout d'abord la façon dont cette "obligation systémique de compliance va pénétrer dans le contentieux contractuel et va ensuite analyser comment de ce fait la "matière systémique de la compliance" va s'articuler au litige contractuel.
Cette hypothèse est encore assez peu étudiée car, en restreignant l'obligation de compliance à la "conformité", produit un rapport unilatéral à la "masse réglementaire", le contrat (et le contentieux lié) y aurait peu de place.
Au mieux, le contrat serait un "objet passif", la réglementation écrivant ou effaçant des clauses, ce qui est davantage un contentieux réglementaire qu'un contentieux contractuel.
Le développement des "contrats de compliance" et des "clauses de compliance", issus de l'autonomie de la volonté change cela, transposant leur nature systémique et téléologique dans le contentieux qu'un cocontractant ou un tiers va porter devant le juge ordinaire du contrat.
Ce sont surtout les stratégies d'un contractant qui vont insérer dans les éléments du litige la compliance, impliquant donc celle-ci. L'on trouve des décisions de justice qui l'illustrent. Une partie au contrat évoquera son obligation de compliance pour obtenir l'exécution d'une obligation que le contrat ne prévoit pas, ou pour obtenir l'engagement de la responsabiilité contractuelle du cocontractant, ou pour se soustraire à une demande d'exécution de son obligation contractuelle. Dans une stratégie plus globale, le litigant peut évoque son obligation systémique de compliance pour destituer le juge du contrat, ou au contraire pour conférer à celui des pouvoirs que celui-ci n'a pas d'ordinaire.
Cette pénétration stratégique va faire se rencontrer la "matière contractuelle et la "matière de la compliance", la matière étant aussi ce par quoi le juge est saisi. Alors la matière contractuelle est souvent bilatérale, singulière et belligueuse, alors que la "matière de la compliance" est de nature systèmique (ce dont les contentieux répressif et administratif rendent davantage compte) et comprend un part essentiel de gracieux.
⛏️Aller plus loin :
🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Contrat de compliance, clauses de compliance, 2022
🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝 La part du gracieux dans le traitement juridictionnel de la compliance ,in 📗Mélanges en l'honneur de Dominique d'Ambra, 2026
🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Contrat de compliance, clauses de compliance, 2022
🕴🏻M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🏛️Mission donnée par le garde des Sceaux, ministre de la Justice, Droit de la Compliance, Travaux en cours, 2025 - 2026.
________