Food for thoughts

► Full Reference: L. d'Avout, "Compliance et conflits de lois. Le droit international de la vigilance-conformité à partir de quelques applications récentes sur le continent européen" ("Compliance and conflict of laws. International Law of Vigilance-Conformity, based on recent applications in Europe"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.173-196.

____

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

____

► English Summary of this Article (done par the Author) : In the absence of constraints derived from the real international law, vigilance-compliance laws themselves determine their scope of application in space. They do so generously, to the extent that they often converge on the same operators and 'overlap' on the world stage. The result is a hybridisation of the law applicable to the definition of Compliance Obligations; a law possibly written "with four hands" or more, which is not always harmonious and which exposes unilateral legislators to occasional retouching their work and their applied regulations.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

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

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

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

____

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

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

____

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

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

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

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

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

________

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

____

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

____

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

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

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

____

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

________

► Full reference : Ch. Lapp, "L’usage de l’arbitrage international pour renforcer l’obligation de Compliance : l’exemple du secteur de la construction" (The use of International Arbitration to strengthen Compliance oObligations: the example of the construction sector)", in  M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Regulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.471-487.

____

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

____

► English summary of this article (by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC): The author emphasises that Arbitration is a particularly significant method of dispute resolution in the construction sector, not only because operators make extensive use of it, but also because this activity gives rise to difficulties that lend themselves to arbitration and at the same time concern compliance issues.

In order to provide the necessary legal security and focusing on the Vigilance Plan especially in French and European Law, the author examines how disputes may arise in relation to it and what they may concern. In light of this, the author examines, on the one hand, the cases in which arbitration may be organised alongside the jurisdiction legally assigned to the Paris Court of Appel and, on the other hand, how Arbitrators will resolve the issues submitted to them.

________

🦉This article is available in full text for those following the Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Obligation de Compliance : construire une structure de compliance produisant des effets crédibles au regard des Buts Monumentaux visés par le Législateur" (Compliance Obligation: build a compliance structure producing credible effects in the perspective of the Monumental Goals targeted by the Legislator), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.3-44.

____

► This article is the introduction to the book

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on the basis this article has been written, with more developments, technical references and hyperlinks

____

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

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

____

► English Summary of this contribution: This article explains what companies' Compliance Obligation" is. Delving into the mass of compliance obligations, it uses the method of classification of those that are subject to an obligation of result and those that are subject to an obligation of means. It justifies the choice of this essential criterion, which changes the objects and the burden of proof of companies that are subject to an obligation of result when it comes to setting up "compliance structures" and are subject to an obligation of means when it comes to the effects produced by these compliance structures.

Indeed, rather than getting bogged down in definitional disputes, given that Compliance Law is itself a nascent branch of Law, the idea of this contribution is to take as a starting point the different legal regimes of so many different compliance obligations to which laws and regulations subject large companies: sometimes they have to apply them to the letter and sometimes they are only sanctioned in the event of fault or negligence. This brings us back to the distinction between obligations of result and obligations of means.

Although it would be risky to transpose the expression and regime of contractual obligations to legal obligations put by legislation, starting from this observation in the evidentiary system of compliance of a plurality of obligations of means and of result, depending on whether it is a question of this or that technical compliance obligation, we must first classify them. It would then appear that this plurality will not constitute a definitive obstacle to the constitution of a single definition of the Compliance Obligation. On the contrary, it makes it possible to clarify the situation, to trace the paths through what is so often described as a legal jumble, an unmanageable "mass of regulations".

Indeed, insofar as the company obliged under Compliance Law participates in the achievement of the Monumental Goals on which this is normatively based, a legal obligation which may be relayed by contract or even by ethics, it can only be an obligation of means, by virtue of this very teleological nature and the scale of the goals targeted, for example the happy outcome of the climate crisis which is beginning or the desired effective equality between human beings. This established principle leaves room for the fact that the behaviour required is marked out by processes put in place by structured tools, most often legally described, for example the establishment of a vigilance plan or regularly organised training courses (effectiveness), are obligations of result, while the positive effects produced by this plan or these training courses (effaciety) are obligations of means. This is even more the case when the Goal is to transform the system as a whole, i.e. to ensure that the system is solidly based, that there is a culture of equality, and that everyone respects everyone else, all of which come under the heading of efficiency.

The Compliance Obligation thus appears unified because, gradually, and whatever the various compliance obligations in question, their intensity or their sector, its structural process prerequisites are first and foremost structures to be established which the Law, through the Judge in particular, will require to be put in place but will not require anything more, whereas striving towards the achievement of the aforementioned Monumental Goals will be an obligation of means, which may seem lighter, but corresponds to an immeasurable ambition, commensurate with these Goals. In addition, because these structures (alert mechanisms, training, audits, contracts and clauses, etc.)  have real meaning if they are to produce effects and behaviours that lead to changes converging towards the Monumental Goals, it is the obligations of means that are most important and not the obligations of result. The judge must also take this into account.

Finally, the Compliance Obligation, which therefore consists of this interweaving of multiple compliance obligations of result and means of using the entreprise's position, ultimately Goals at system efficiency, in Europe at system civilisation, for which companies must show not so much that they have followed the processes correctly (result) but that this has produced effects that converge with the Goals sought by the legislator (effects produced according to a credible trajectory). This is how a crucial company, responsible Ex Ante, should organise itself and behave.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

____

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

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

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

____

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

____

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

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

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

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

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Obligation sur Obligation vaut" ("Obligation upon obligation work"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.324-354.

____

📝read the article

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on the basis this article has been written, with more developments, technical references and hyperlinks

____

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

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

____

► English Summary of this contribution: The demonstration of the part played by Will in the Compliance Obligation incumbent on companies is based on the distinction and articulation between the Regulatory Legal Obligation and the spontaneous Obligation of companies, in the use that companies make of their will to implement their Regulatory Legal Obligation and the use that they make of it to produce even new ambitions. This is why the demonstration is carried out in 3 stages.

The first part of the demonstration consists in finding the part played by the free will of companies in their Compliance Obligation by putting an end to two confusions: the first, which, within the Contract and Tort Law itself but also within Compliance Law, splits up and confuses "free will" and "consent", which would no longer require freely expressed acceptance; the second, which, specific to Compliance Law, confuses "Compliance" and "conformity", reducing the former to mechanical obedience, which would exclude any free will.

Having clarified this, the rest of this study focuses on the 2 ways in which a company subject to a Compliance Obligation by regulations expresses a part of its free will, which the study expresses in this proposed adage: Obligation upon Obligation is valid, since the regulatory legal obligation to which the company responds by the obedience owed by all those subject to the Law may be superimposed by its free will, which will then oblige it.

The first case of Obligation upon Obligation, studied in a second part, concerns the means by which the Regulatory Legal Compliance Obligation is implemented, the company subject to the Monumental Goals set by the Law remaining free to choose the means by which it will contribute to achieving them. Its free will will thus be exercised over the choice and implementation of the means. This can take two legal forms: contracts on the one hand and "commitments" on the other.

Thirdly, the second case of Obligation upon Obligation, which is more radical, is that in which, in addition to Compliance's regulatory legal Obligation, the company draws on its free will to repeat the terms of its regulatory legal Obligation (because it is prohibited from contradicting it), a repetition which can be far-reaching, because the legal nature (and therefore the legal regime) is changed. The judgment handed down by the The Hague Court of Appeal on 12 November 2024, in the case law Shell, illustrates this. What is more, the free will of the company can play its part in the Compliance Obligation by increasing the Compliance Obligation. This is where the alliance is strongest. The interpretation of the specific obligations that result must remain that of the Monumental Goals in a teleological application that gives coherence to the whole.

________

► Full Reference: J.-Ch. Roda "La preuve de la bonne exécution de la Vigilance au regard du système probatoire de Compliance (Proof that Vigilance has been properly carried out with regard to the Compliance evidence system)", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Éditions Lefebvre - Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.679-689.

____

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

____

► English summary of this contribution : Taking the Duty of Vigilance as an illustration, the first part of the article examines the question of who must prove about that and in what order. There are no rules in the legal dispositions specific to the Vigilance Duty duty that expressly reverse the burden of proof, to the extent of placing it on the company that should demonstrate that it has correctly fulfilled its obligation. Instead, it is needed to return to general law, which makes the burden of proof vary according to the nature of the obligations incumbent on the company as a result of its Duty of Vigilance, in particular between simplly drawing up a plan and drawing it up such that its effectiveness can be expected to give rise to an obligation on those who dispute it to demonstrate its ineffectiveness. In any event, the 2 litigant parties immediately seek to fuel the debate with elements in their favour, whatever their position in the process.

This brings us to the second part of the article, devoted to the question of what constitutes proof of proper performance of the Vigilance Duty. Requiring proof of a positive fact and the constitution of a self-evidence of conformity would both be excessive and would distance the company from the Monumental Goals that are its compass. Instead, it is pertinent to distinguish between Compliance Structures, for which the proof requirements must be high, and Expected Compliance Actions, for which proof of efforts is sufficient, the obligation being only of means. In fact, companies will be wise to provide proof of their efforts as early as possible.

The third part therefore deals logically with the means of proof available to the parties. Claimants act on the principle of freedom of evidence and benefit from numerous sources of information, but the most serious difficulties arise when the facts to be proven are located outside the European Union. The company can establish that the plan has been implemented using various types of evidence, but it would appear that the standard of proof is high, even if the Vigilance Plan were to be regarded as an act of management.

________

🦉This article is available in full texte for people who follow  Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche teaching

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

____

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

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

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

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

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

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

____

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

________

► Référence complète : M. Chapuis, "Le juge de l’amiable et la compliance", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Éditions Lefebvre - Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, sous presse

____

📕lire une présentation générale de l'ouvrage, L'Obligation de Compliance, dans lequel cet article est publié

____

► Résumé de l'article (fait par le Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : L'auteur montre que l'office général du juge en matière de médiation est particulièrement bienvenu dans les instances de vigilance. Cela tient en premier lieu à l'office procédurale du Juge, l'injonction de rencontrer un médiateur trouve bonne place ici, et d'autres mesures d'administration judiciaire qui, de par leur nature non-juridictionnelle, convient bien à l'enjeu, par exemple le sursis à statuer en cas de pourparlers, process qui s'intercalent avec le procès à proprement parler. Cela permet de faciliter la résolution du litige, sans avoir à le trancher, pour mieux satisfaire les buts de la loi. C'est en cela que le Droit de la Compliance, qui est structuré à partir de ses Buts Monumentaux, appelle tout particulièrement ses techniques non-juridictionnelles de médiation et cela éclaire les premières décisions judiciaires rendues en matière de Vigilance. 

Dans un second temps, l'auteur expose la structuration du règlement amiable. En effet, il est délicat et décisif de bien choisir les moments où les conciliations, les césures, les ARA, etc., auront le meilleur effet. En outre, le choix du médiateur doit intégrer la compétence et l'acceptabilité par les parties, l'idée d'une "liste interne" s'il y a des chambres spécialisées pouvant être explorée. 

L'auteur peut conclure ainsi : "

Le contentieux naissant du devoir de vigilance et, plus généralement du droit de la compliance appellent ainsi une structuration des modes amiables, condition de leur efficacité. Suivant les exemples, très partiels, qui précèdent, l’amiable dans la compliance suppose d’abord de respecter les étapes de la loi éclairées par la jurisprudence. Ensuite, il s’agira d’identifier celles de ces étapes contentieuses les plus opportunes pour faire intervenir des médiateurs et conciliateurs spécialistes aux compétences identifiées et agréées par le juge et les parties.".

_________

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

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le Juge requis pour une Obligation de Compliance effective" ("The Judge required for an effective Compliance Obligation"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance" 2025, pp.741-775.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

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

____

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

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

____

► English summary of this contribution : The Judge is a character who seems weak in a Compliance Law that seems so powerful in a world where Technology is developing even a more impressive power. But present and future cases show, on the contrary, that he or she has a central role to play and that his/her role must be to use his/her own strength to remain what he/she is: the guardian of the Rule of Law, which is not so obvious because many Compliance tools, which are technological in nature, are in a way 'insensitive' to what we hold dear, the protection of human beings, which is based on the diligence of companies (I). 

The second role that we can expect of the Judge is that not only does he/she help to ensure the permanence of this Rule of Law, which relies to a large extent on him:Her in the face of a future world that is unknown to us, mainly in its digital and climatic dimensions, perspectives that Compliance Law seeks to grasp, by renewing Regulation Law, by acting in relation to companies whose role is active, which leads the Judge to control them and to be aware of the claims that can be made against them, without taking the place of their management powers (II). This presupposes a new method (III), and all the judges, however diverse, will converge in an active dialogue between the judges, which will enable, firstly, the traditional role of the judge, linked to the Rule of Law, to endure in a rapidly changing world and, secondly, each judge to take on this new role implied by Compliance Law (IV).

The perfect triangle will then be established, the strength and simplicity of which allows the use of the singular and the retention of capital letters for each of these three terms: Regulation Compliance Judge.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

____

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

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

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

____

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

____

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

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

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

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

________

► Full Reference: A.-C. Rouaud, "L’intensité de l’obligation de vigilance selon les secteurs : le cas des opérateurs financiers" (The intensity of the obligation of vigilance depending on the sector: the case of financial operators), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) an Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2024, forthcoming

____

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

____

► English summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : The author develops the case of financial operators and shows that if they are subject to very heavy obligations of vigilance, it is above all because of the systemic risks of the markets, obligations which are consubstantial with their activities, because these operators are often in charge of market infrastructures or operating services, which make them all belong to the category of regulated professions.

Despite this uniqueness, the obligation of vigilance has many facets, ranging from policing and customer surveillance to warning and protection, which can be very limited, as the fight against money laundering aims to protect the system (kyc).

In addition, this obligation to exercise vigilance serves different goals, which explains the diversity of sanctions, because the intensity of the obligation also varies. The fight against systemic risk is certainly a common goal, but there are also concerns about protecting specific categories, such as investors (from a more European perspective).

However, the general interest is now being renewed, as market protection is coupled with a concern for Sustainability. This is reflected in the variability of sanctions, ranging from disciplinary sanctions, handled by the financial markets regulatory bodies, to the obligation to put in place compliance programmes against which breaches are sanctioned per se. Private enforcement is developing in tandem with public enforcement, with a transformation of the litigation risk for companies, which is highly sensitive to extraterritoriality and the scope of soft law.

________

► Full Reference: R. Gauvain & B. Balian, "Opposition et convergence des systèmes juridiques américains et européens dans les règles et cultures de compliance" ("Opposition and Convergence of American and European Legal Systems in Compliance Rules and Cultures"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Editions Lefebvre - Dalloz, "Régulations & Compliance" Serie, 2025, pp.401-417.

____

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

____

► English Summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : The authors approach Compliance Law through its tools, mainly compliance programmes through which companies comply with regulations and investigations conducted by companies at the request of public authorities to identify risks and new modes of defence consisting of entering into agreements with prosecuting authorities. 

The article highlights the American inspiration behind this movement, whereby the State, primarily for the sake of efficiency, transfers the responsibility for pursuing "Monumental Goals" to businesses. Based on this, the article first shows how American mechanisms have been imported into Europe, particularly France, with the Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public, taking on many of the characteristics of the DPA, even if some specific features remain, for example in the alert mechanisms.   Secondly, the convergence between the two systems is shown, because through the compliance obligations that form the core of these compliance tools, it is always Western values that are expressed, values that are common to American Law and European Law and European countries. It has enabled this importation, and we can now see that these values are more strongly upheld by Europe, particularly through the Vigilance duty and the DSA. 

____

🦉This article is available in full text  (in French) to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

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

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

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

____

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

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

____

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

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

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

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

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

________

🌐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, "Exerçant un pouvoir de sanction, le Régulateur doit informer la "personne concernée" de son droit de se taire (cons. const., 26 sept. 2025)", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 27 septembre 2025

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

► Résumé de l'article  : Le Conseil constitutionnel a rendu le 26 septembre 2025 une décision n°2025-1164 , Société Eurotitrisation et autres qui déclare une disposition du Code monétaire et financier contraire à la Constitution.

Le Conseil déclare, et cela ne surprend pas notamment parce qu'il enrichit une jurisprudence débutée en 2016 affirmant régulièrement le caractère constitutionnel et autonome du "droit de se taire", que le fait pour le CMF de ne pas contraindre la Commission des sanctions de l'Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF) à informer une personne concernée de son droit de se faire rend de ce meme fait le dispositif procédural organisé par ce texte (IV de l'art.L 621-15 CMF, qui ne formulait qu'en termes généraux l'obligation de respecter le principe du contradictoire et des droits de la défense, sans viser le droit de se taire) contraire à la Constitution.

Cette sanction, intègre donc la règle dans la loi française, car en censurant à effet immédiat un silence le Conseil injecte immédiatement le droit de se taire dans les procédues en cours devant la Commission des sanctions de l'AMF (I). La solution était prévisible et vaut pour toutes les Autorités de régulations (II). Mais elle montre les tensions entre l'exercice du pouvoir spécial de sanction, qui appelle le droit de se taire au profit des "personnes concernées" et le pouvoir général de régulation, dont la sanction n'est pourtant qu'un outil, régulation qui suppose l'obtention d'informations et supporte mal ce silence (III). Plus largement, c'est l'affrontement entre l'impératif des secrets et l'impératif de l'information qui se déroule (IV).

____

📧lire l'article publié le 27 septembre dans la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation 

► Référence complète : Civ. 1ière., 24 sept 2025, n°23-23.869, M c/ société Volkswagen Group France et société Volkswagen Bank Gesellschaft mit Beschraenkter Haftung 

____

► Référence complète : I. Kampourakis, « Transparency Legislation in Global Value Chains: Decentralization Market Power, and Global Hierarchies", in H.Shamir, B.Arora, S. Banerjee & T. Barkay (ed.), Modern Slavery and the Governance of Global Value Chains, Cambridge University Press, series "Development Trajectories in Global Value Chains", 2025, pp.70-94.

____

📗Lire l'ouvrage dans lequel cet article est publié

____

📝lire l'article

____

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance Law and Systemic Litigation", 15 September 2025, Madrid.

____

This speech is the opening speech of the event.

🧮 See the general program of the event

____

📅See the slides (not used), basis for this speechs

____

► Summary of the conference: This  manifestation, made fo many interventions, is about the role and the evolution of the in-house lawyers in the Europe on the move. I opened the event by focusing on the importance of the Compliance which drives the companies now, in the future and for the future. It is quite difficile because currently Compliance Law is quite misunderstund by almost every. Therefore the first part of my intervention has been the explanation of what is the very new branch of Law, built of political Monumental Goals (Compliance Law is not just the obligation to be conform with, just to obey), the specificity of European Compliance Monumental Goals (not only the sustainability of systems, but also the concern for present and future human beins implied in them). 

This systemic new branch of Law, humanist branch of Law in Europe put the Judge at its center.

Par translation, this is creating a new sort of Litigation : the Compliance Systemic Litigation. Its object is the future (as Compliance Law itselft).

Contrary to the "conformity", which might be left to algorithms, Compliance Law, inseparable to Systemic Litigation, are giving new role for Judges, for external lawyers and for internal lawyers.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Régulation" (Regulatory Law), in J.-Fr. Kerléo et E. Lemaire (dir.), Dictionnaire de l'éthique publique, LexisNexis, 2025, pp. 

____

📗read the general presentation of the Dictionary.

____

📝read the article  (in French)

_____

► English Summary of this article defining Regulation: To define Regulation (Regulatory Law), the article begins with its origins, which were a source of misunderstanding, since the term Regulation might refer to simple regulations, thus masking the real branch of Law which is the Law of Regulation. But this confusion with simple and formal regulations has diminished Regulatory Law its importance, its novelty and its originality, and, by placing it within Public Law, equated Regulation on the one hand with the transition from public monopolies to a competitive organisation, and on the other hand privileged the legal study of what fell within the remit of the Administrative Courts, i.e. telecommunications, transport and energy, leaving out the Regulatory Law of banking and financial sector . As a result, the unity and strength of Regulatory Law is still difficult to perceive and manage today, while its relationship with competition and Europe remains difficult.

Regulatory Law is all the more difficult to define because it is still common to oppose, as was the case in the 1980s, "Economic Regulatory Law", which would aim to set economic efficiency objectives within the State, and "Public Liberties Regulatory Law", which would be alternatives to each other, preventing the audiovisual, media and digital sectors in particular from being legally perceived as an industry. We are still paying for this initial conception. All the more so since Regulatory Law is the second pillar on which Europe is built, along with Competition, with which it is linked. It can be identified by the existence of a regulated 'sector', most often through the establishment of a regulatory authority, generally in the form of an Independent Administrative Body. But it is defined by the prevalence of the technical and political goals pursued, which are not spontaneously achieved and which aim to favour the human beings involved in economic organisations.

While the function of Competition Authorities is to maintain the dynamism of competitive markets and to punish behaviour that hinders them without creating that dynamism, Regulatory Law, through its own rules, principles, institutions, procedures and decisions, will create non-spontaneous équilibra and maintain them over time.  To do this, it will inject non-spontaneous procedures, such as transparency, or generate obligations and powers because these are necessary for this balance to be achieved. This can take the form of exclusive rights, which can go as far as the creation of monopolies, particularly on transport infrastructures, or the form of pricing and tarification, which can go as far as free access. Access rights are essential, whether technical or political (access to networks, access to healthcare).

The political dimension of Regulatory Law is very much in evidence, as Europe is developing its own form of Regulation compared with the USA or China, demonstrating the link between Regulation and Sovereignty, the criterion? of the technical sector becoming less significant. This is illustrated by the clash over algorithmic systems (AI).  In this way, regulation is not a technical reaction to a "market failure", but the manifestation of a zone's political power both internally and externally. The DSA (2022) is an example of this, imposing this same logic extraterritoriality in the digital space through the Digital Services Act (DSA) adopted in 2022.

____

📝read the presentation of the other article written by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche for this Dictionary: "Compliance"

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference:: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance", in J.-Fr. Kerléo & E. Lemaire (dir.), Dictionnaire de l'éthique publique, LexisNexis, 2025, pp. 

____

📗 read the general presentation of the Dictionary.

____

📝read the article (in French).

_____

► English Summary of the article defining what is Compliance: The article explains Compliance in 7 points.

Firstly, it states that Compliance oscillates between a weak and a strong definition. It can be defined weakly as the demonstration of obedience to all applicable regulations, or it can be defined strongly as active participation in the achievement of 'monumental' ambitions for the future of the social group. Positive legal rules and case law are increasingly revealing the relevance of the strong definition, with the weak definition referring only to conformity to the Law.

Secondly, this understanding of the new branch of Law known as Compliance Law will enable us to master the regulations specifically relating to compliance (RGPD, French laws such as Sapin 2 Act and Vigilance Act, AML/FT, European AI Act, etc.), which are both more specific and more restrictive than the general obligation to comply with the applicable legal rules.

Thirdly, everyone can see the move from "extraterritoriality" to another thing which is the indifference to territoryd: Compliance is the right instrument for the digital space and for chains of activities.

Fourthly, this is due to the very nature of Compliance, which consists in internalising in companies in a position to be active the “Monumental Negative Goal” of preventing the collapse of systems (energy, climate, digital, banking, financial, algorithmic, etc.).

Fifthly, this internalisation is carried out by States and public authorities in entities in a position to act, i.e. in concrete terms in companies in a position to be active to reach the “Monumental Goals” by contributing to the improvement of systems so that these systems benefit in the present and the future the people who are de jure and de facto involved in them.

Sixthly, these goals become positive when it comes to educating people about probity and effective equality between human beings, notably through training policies. In this respect, Vigilance is the “cutting edge” of Compliance.

Seventhly, an “ex ante responsibility” of Crucial Operators subject to Compliance is emerging, and is articulated by Systemic Litigation which aims to balance and maintain systems, carried by States and these crucial companies.

____

📝read the preentation of the other article written by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche for this Dictionary: "Régulation"

________

► Full Reference: M. Séjean, "La définition de l’obligation de compliance confrontée au droit de la cybersécurité (The definition of the Compliance Obligation in Cybersecurity Law)", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, forthcoming.

____

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

____

► English Summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : The contribution compares the general definition given by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche with the specific nature of the world of cybersecurity, its legal organisation and the principles that govern it.

 Taking up all the elements of this general definition, according to which the Compliance Obligation consists in "building a compliance structure producing credible effects in the perspective of the Monumental Goals targeted by the Legislator", the author shows that beyond the specificities of cybersecurity rules,  this corresponds in practice and in each of the elements of this definition, confronted with the various elements that constitute what is required in terms of cybersecurity, to what is technically required of the entities and persons concerned in terms of cybersecurity, which is actually thought out in these terms.

________

► Référence complète : M. Mekki, "Peut-on repenser la responsabilité à l’aune du devoir de Vigilance, pointe avancée de la Compliance ?", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, sous presse.

____

📕lire une présentation générale de l'ouvrage, L'obligation de Compliance, dans lequel cet article est publié

____

► Résumé de l'article (fait par le Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : L'auteur développe les tensions que l'Obligation de Vigilance engendre sur le concept même de responsabilité. Répertoriant toutes les manifestations, très diverses, de la Vigilance, selon les domaines, il observe que se forme une logique téléologique de prévention et de gestion des risques systémiques, ce qu'est la compliance, sans doute remède à un État impuissant, s'appuyant sur une grande pluralité des normes.

La question est de savoir si l'on peut passer de ces droits spéciaux mais d'un esprit commun à un droit commun transformé. Les premières décisions rendues à propos de la loi de 2017 répondent par la négative, mais la question est ouverte.

Il faut alors revenir sur le concept même de responsabilité, qui pourrait accueillir un mécanisme général de Vigilance. Ce concept est très flexible et présente l'adaptabilité requise pour accueillir la logique de compliance. En effet, la responsabilité, classiquement ex post peut passer ex ante, à travers la notion de dette, non plus juridique mais éthique, car les entreprises doivent être "dignes de confiance".

La responsabilité préventive vise alors à restaurer l'équilibre des systèmes dans la poursuite des Buts Monumentaux, pour l'efficacité et l'efficience des systèmes. La responsabilité se mixte de subjectivité et d'objectivité, le risque devenant central (par rapport à la faute), le litige dépassant l'intérêt des parties, la remédiation devenant le sujet central dans un procès en responsabilité à repenser : le dialogue doit y être au centre, entre les juridictions, entre les entreprises et les parties prenantes, dans un office du juge adapté.

________

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

► Référence complète : M. Françon, "L’intensité du devoir de vigilance dans le secteur bancaire", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, sous presse.

____

📕lire une présentation générale de l'ouvrage, L'Obligation de Compliance, dans lequel cet article est publié

____

► Résumé de l'article (fait par le Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : L'auteur développe le cas des opérateurs bancaire et d'assurance. Il insiste sur le fait qu'en matière bancaire et d'assurance, la vigilance consiste dans une obligation de traiter des informations, au besoin préalablement collectées, en vue de prévenir la survenance d'un risque systémique.

L'identification et la prévention du risque est une obligation de moyens renforcée qui, dans ce cadre, connaît des variations d'intensité. L'obligation est ancienne, alors que le devoir de vigilance est récent. Ce décalage dans le temps s'explique parce que la vigilance obligée est consubstantielle à l'activité même du banquier et de l'assureur et du fait du caractère systémique du secteur depuis toujours, ce qui produit une imbrication du droits dur et souple.

Les variations de l'intensité de l'obligation de vigilance tiennent quant à elles au fait qu'il y a deux types d'obligations : celles qui sont imposées dans l'intérêt de l'activité et du client et celles qui le sont dans l'intérêt de la stabilité du système. Les secondes sont beaucoup plus fortes que les premières. Elles pèsent aussi bien sur le banquier que sur le client. Ainsi les obligations en matière de blanchiment ont pour seul but l'intérêt général, le client ne pouvant se prévaloir des manquements de la banque (Com. 28 avril 2004). D'ailleurs, en matière de gel des avoirs, l'obligation de vigilance devient de résultat.

Dans l'intérêt général lui-même, l'intensité varie en fonction des buts poursuivis, engendrant des vigilances "standard, simplifiée, renforcée", en fonction du risque sous-jacent. En outre, des droits interférents font varier l'obligation, notamment la protection des droits à la protection des données personnelles, ou le droit à la non-immixtion du banquier. Enfin, interfèrent les obligations de vigilance pesant sur les tiers, y compris situés hors de l'Europe.

________

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

________

________

► Full Reference: J.-Ch. Roda "Obligations de compliance et concurrence : les liaisons dangereuses ? (Compliance obligations and Competition: dangerous liaisons?)", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Éditions Lefebvre - Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, forthcoming.

____

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

____

► English summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC): The author stresses that if Compliance Law and Competition Law may seem far apart today, it is because many people today have a restricted and inaccurate view of Competition Law. Indeed, if Competition Law is reduced to being no more than that which enables offer and demand rule to function fully, then 'compliance obligations' need to be injected into this sort of 'natural law' of the market backed up by the legal system, compliance obligations giving humanity to the whole. But if Competition Law is given back its rightful dimension, which it has in its more classical conception, the links between the obligations arising from the 2 branches of Law find harmonious relationships.

They are all the more necessary because, particularly through the Duty of Vigilance, Civil Competition Law is going to interfere because of the contractualisation of this legal obligation and the possible significant imbalance that could be identified, the article stressing that the application of Compliance stipulations on a partner could end up being analysed as a power, justifying merger control or at the very least a dominant position legal qualification, the abuse of which will be sanctioned. It is for this reason that the 2024 CS3D reminds us that it must be implemented in respect with competition legal rules. However, the author emphasises that it is towards a kind of 'Ethical Competition' that compliance obligations are leading, leading to new practices.

The results, described in the second part of the article, are increasing the influence of the Compliance Obligation, which embodies the ambition of a "just transition" and a "social Europe". These ambitions are rejected by the advocates of the so-called "neo-liberal" conception of what Competition Law should be, but the conception of "Competition-Means" was indeed that of the American designers of the corpus of appropriate rules in the nineteenth century, when it was necessary in particular to fight against the large infrastructure monopolies, and it was also that of the jurists who founded the European Union.

Only the minimal view of what falls within the scope of competition leads to opposition to the Compliance Obligation. The author therefore stresses that "il semble aujourd’hui évident que la compliance doit être la boussole du droit de la concurrence (it seems obvious today that Compliance must be the compass of Competition Law)". It is in this spirit that companies must draft the compliance clauses that will multiply to structure the value chains they have set up, providing in particular for the resolution of tensions, or even conflicts, with partners.

The author concludes that it is in this way that crucial companies will demonstrate their "particular responsibility" both and in the same way with regard to Competition Law and Compliance Law.

________

🦉This article is available for people who follow Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche teaching