► Référence complète : Th. Goujon-Bethan, "Les enjeux présents à venir de l’articulation des principes de procédure civile et commerciale avec la logique de compliance", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2024, à paraître

____

📕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 le Code de procédure civile, parce qu'il est exceptionnellement bien conçu et dirigé, peut répondre à l'ampleur de la transformation que le Droit de la Compliance apporte.

Le Droit de la Compliance est normativement ancré dans ses Buts Monumentaux : ceux-ci sont portés en tant que tels devant le juge dans des "causes systémiques".

Or, le Code de procédure civile distingue, et les travaux des auteurs du Code comme ceux de la doctrine le montrent, qu'il faut distinguer le litige et le conflit. En effet, dans une "cause systémique" telle que le Droit de la Compliance les emporte nécessairement (climat, protection des internautes, égalité effective des êtres humains, durabilité des systèmes bancaires, etc.) ce sont des parties qui sont en litiges, tandis que le conflit embrasse lui les systèmes eux-mêmes et d'autres entités.
La procédure doit intégrer non seulement le litige mais encore le conflit. Cela implique notamment que l'on s'occupe non seulement du litige, mais encore du conflit, lequel ne s'éteint pas nécessairement avec le litige, et ne trouve pas les mêmes solutions que celles demandées par le litige. C'est notamment dans cette dernière perspective, essentiellement dans une procédure de "Cause Systémique de Compliance" que les techniques de médiation, d'amicus curiae, d'un juge qui se situe ex ante, etc., s'imposent. Elles sont disponibles à travers des articles du Code de procédure civile : il suffit que les juges, comprenant ce que sont les "Causes Systémiques de Compliance" s'en saisissent.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► 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 (dir.), L'obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2024, forthcoming.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on which this article was 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

____

► English Summary of this article: A number of ideas are beginning to emerge to describe the relationship that needs to be built up between General Procedural Law and Compliance Obligation, if only to take account of the emerging litigation in the field of Compliance Law.

At first sight, however, it would appear that Compliance Law does not give rise to any procedural obligation, since Compliance is designed to develop ex ante, in order to avoid the courts. Compliance by design should perfect this aim, the presence of any jurisdictional proceedings being a failure in itself and because of the delays and uncertainties that are associated with them by nature.

If we accept the presence of judges, lawyers and procedural rights and obligations, in particular the right of action and the rights of defence, for many it would be only in order to respect the Rule of Law, a tribute that must be paid, a dose of inefficiency within efficiency, thus pitting the disciplines against each other, in this case Law on the one hand and Economics and Management on the other. More often than not, we leave it at that, either to admit it and strike a balance, or to regret it and wait to see which logic will prevail, between procedural rights and obligations on the one hand and compliance rights and obligations on the other...

On the contrary, we must reject this logic of communicating vessels.

In fact, Compliance Law is an extension of Regulatory Law, which it extends beyond sectors and borders, and whose normativity is anchored in the Compliance Monumental Goals set by political and public Authorities, which aim to ensure that in the future systems do not collapse, or even improve so that the human beings who depend on them are not crushed by them but, on the contrary, benefit from them.

This gives rise to "systemic compliance litigation", which gives rise to specific procedural principles. First of all, it is important to clarify what a "systemic case" is, a concept that I proposed in 2021, and to which the cases that are now being brought before the courts correspond. The specific nature of these emerging systemic compliance disputes, which are objective disputes, similar to administrative disputes, which fully justifies the presence of the public prosecutor and raises the question of whether there would be a 'natural judge' for these systemic compliance disputes, have major procedural consequences, particularly on procedural rights and obligations: in particular the right to be a party to the proceedings, even if you are a party to the dispute, which is the case for the stakeholders.

The result is a new alliance between the Compliance Obligation and General Procedural Law, which gives rise to compliance obligations of a procedural nature within Compliance Law itself. It is no longer necessary to divide Ex Ante and Ex Post, but to borrow compliance principles and insert them into jurisdictional procedures, as envisaged by the Haut Conseiller François Ancel (moving from Ex Ante to Ex Post), while it is necessary to insert procedural principles into compliance obligations within companies (moving from Ex Post to Ex Ante), as shown in the book Compliance Jurisdictionalisation. This is particularly illustrated in relation to the Obligation of Vigilance, which is the spearhead of the Compliance Obligation. 

This is particularly relevant in relation to three procedural obligations which must now structure the compliance obligations in the behaviour of the companies and parties concerned, even independently of any jurisdictional proceedings, since the court may be called upon to verify their fulfillment on both sides and to promote them, which gives him/her an ex ante role: the obligation to discuss (adversarial principle), the obligation to provide information (evidentiary system) and the obligation to demonstrate (principle of the motivation).

This alliance thus changes both Compliance Law and Procedural Law, since it changes the role of the judge. But this question of the judge's office is the subject of a separate contribution for this book.

________

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

____

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

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

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

____

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

____

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

____

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

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

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

____

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

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

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

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

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

____

📝read article (in French)

________

► Référence complète : F. Ancel, "Quel rôle pour le juge aujourd’hui dans la compliance ? Quel office processuel du juge dans la compliance ?", in Conseil d'État et Cour de cassation, De la régulation à la compliance : quel rôle pour le juge ? Regards croisés du Conseil d'Etat et de la Cour de cassation - Colloque du 2 juin 2023, La Documentation française, coll. "Droits et Débats", 2024, pp. 101-119

____

► Résumé de l'article : 

________

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, L'émergence du Contentieux Systémique, document de travail, mars 2024.

____

🎤 Ce document de travail a été élaboré pour servir de base à la 1ière intervention, relative à "L'émergence du Contentieux Systémique", dans la conférence-débat sur Importance et spécificité du Contentieux Systémique Émergent , qui s'est tenue à la Cour d'appel de Paris le 29 mars 2024.

____

📝Il est aussi la base de l'article qui s'en suivra.

____

► Résumé du document de travail : Nous voyons émerger ce qu'il convient d'émerger un "Contentieux Systémique". Cette notion, proposée en 2021, vise l'hypothèse dans laquelle un système est "impliqué" dans une "cause" particulière soumise au juge. Il ne faut confondre présence d'un système et analyse systémique d'un phénomène. Le terme de "cause" doit être entendu au sens procédurale, tel que l'article 5 du Code civil l'utilise. Précisément, la prohibition portée par l'article 5 du Code civil ne s'applique pas parce qu'un système ainsi impliqué appelle des réponses et des solutions de fait et non pas nécessairement des solutions générales et abstraites : la solution de nature et de portée systémique que la présence d'un système dans une cause appelle peut être une solution de fait, même si elle irradie l'ensemble du système en cause. Mais précisément parce que la présence d'un système dans la cause entraîne souvent une question elle-même systémique, le juge s'il veut respecter l'article 4 du Code civil y répondre, non pas seulement a minima en n'éludant pas la question, par exemple celles des risques systémiques, mais encore pleinement en apporter des solutions systémiques, par exemple des remédiations pour préserver à l'avenir la solidité et la durabilité des systèmes impliqués dans le cas. 

Ces systèmes peuvent être de différente nature : bancaire, financier, transport, sanitaire, énergétique, numérique, algorithmique ou climatique. Leur présence dans des cas portés à la connaissance des juges, dont la variété et les difficultés seront vus dans des contributions ultérieures, amènent à des questions de base relative à l'émergence du Contentieux Systémique : en premier lieu, comment peut-on définir le Contentieux Systémique ? En second lieu, qu'est-ce qu'il fait émerger cette catégorie de contentieux ? Des réponses apportées à ces deux questions découlent des conséquences pratiques essentielles. 

Les solutions nouvelles doivent être conçues suivant que l'on admet que le système doit être considéré comme une "partie au litige", qui lui permettrait par une entité étant légitime à l'exprimer, d'alléguer des prétentions et de formuler des demandes contre un adversaire, ou comme une "partie à l'instance", catégorie beaucoup plus vaste, qui permettrait au juge d'entendre les intérêts des systèmes impliqués sans que des personnes ne puissent pour autant au nom d'un système formuler des prétentions à l'encontre ou au bénéfice d'une partie au litige.

____

🔓lire le document de travail ci-dessous⤵️

► Référence complète : Mélanges en l'honneur du Professeur Loïc Cadiet, LexisNexis, 2023, 600 p.

____

📗lire la 4ième de couverture de l'ouvrage

____

📗lire le sommaire de l'ouvrage

____

► Résumé de l'ouvrage (fait par l'éditeur) : "Maître incontesté du droit du procès, auteur d'innombrables livres et articles de référence sur la matière, le Professeur Loïc Cadiet est aussi l'homme du dépassement. Dépassement de sa terre d'origine, la Bretagne, même s'il ne s'en est jamais vraiment départi, pour conquérir Paris puis le monde. Dépassement de sa discipline d'origine, le droit de la responsabilité civile, auquel il a consacré sa thèse de doctorat et un livre majeur. Dépassement de sa discipline d'adoption, le droit judiciaire privé, en investissant sans cesse d'autres champs voisins, comme la sociologie, la philosophie, l'économie et bien sûr l'histoire. Dépassement de sa discipline encore, en la projetant, avant tout le monde, vers de nouveaux horizons, comme la contractualisation du procès, ou en la réorganisant autour de principes directeurs modernes et inédits . Dépassement de l'Université enfin, par les nombreuses missions qu'il a remplies hors les murs et notamment la dernière comme membre du Conseil supérieur de la magistrature.

Mais le Professeur Loïc Cadiet est aussi un universitaire dévoué, infatigable directeur de master, de mémoires et de thèses, ayant occupé de nombreuses responsabilités dans les universités où il a été en poste, jusqu'à la présidence du jury d'agrégation de droit privé et sciences criminelles en 2021, après avoir déjà siégé deux fois comme membre. Cette vie d'universitaire accomplie a été merveilleusement relatée dans la leçon magistrale de clôture qu'il a dispensée le 6 avril 2023 pour ce qui fut son dernier cours comme professeur titulaire et qui est publiée en ouverture de ces Mélanges.

Ceux-ci reflètent la vitalité intellectuelle de leur dédicataire. Avec 119 contributions, rédigées par des universitaires et par des praticiens, par des auteurs français et des auteurs étrangers qu'il a connus comme président de l'Association internationale de droit processuel, en droit judiciaire privé ou en d'autres disciplines, ces Mélanges feront évidemment date dans la littérature juridique, à l'image de celui à qui ils sont dédiés et qui occupe une place sans égale dans le monde académique et celui de la justice.

Nul doute que ce beau livre, magnifique témoignage de respect et d'amitié, obtiendra auprès des lecteurs le succès qu'il mérite et que justifie la personnalité, aussi discrète qu'exceptionnelle, de son récipiendaire.".

____

📝lire une présentation de l'article de Muriel Fabre-Magnan, "Critique de la convergence des responsabilités contractuelle et délictuelle. L'exemple du devoir de vigilance"

________

♾️follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Adjusting General Procedural Law to Compliance Law by the nature of things", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, coll. "Compliance & Regulation", to be published. 

____

📝read the article

____

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

____

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

____

The principal elements of this articles had been presented during the scientific manifestation held on September 23, 2021, at Dauphine University in Paris, coorganised by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the Institute Droit Dauphine. 

In the book this article is placed in the chapter II about the General Procedural Law in the Compliance Law.  

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of regulation & Compliance - JoRC): General Procedural law is an invention, essentially due to professor Motulsky, going well beyond the gain that one always has in comparing types of procedures with each other. As he asserted, there is Natural Law in General Procedural Law, in that as soon as there is the Rule of Law Principle there cannot be, whatever the "procedure", even the "process" such and such way of doing things: for example, to decide, to seize the one who decides, to listen before deciding, to contest the one who has decided.

General Procedural Law therefore depends on the nature of things. However, Compliance Law organizes things in a new way. Therefore, both the simple and iron principles of General Procedural Law creep in where we do not expect them at first sight, because there is no judge, this character around whom ordinary procedures fit together. The principles of General Procedural Law are essential in companies. Even if the regulations do not breathe a word about it, it is up to the Judges, in particular the Supreme Courts, to recognize this nature of things because on this effect of nature that  General Procedural Law is built: when compliance mechanisms oblige companies to strike, General Procedural law must oblige, even in the silence of the texts, to arm those who can be hit, even stand up against devices that would set aside too much these defenses that are easily considered contrary to efficiency (I).

But because it is a question of making room for this nature of the things of which the Rule of Law Principle entrusts the custody to the Judge and the Lawyer, the General Procedural Law must also adjust itself to what the extraordinary new branch of Law Compliance Law is. Indeed, Compliance Law is extraordinary in that it expresses the political pretention to act now so that the future will not be catastrophic, by detecting and preventing the realization of systemic risks, or even that it is better, by building effective equality or real concern for others. Because it is the Monumental Goals that defines this new branch of Law, a disputed systemic issue, possibly disputed by several parties before a judge, the procedural principles used by the court must be broadened considerably: they must then include civil society and the future (II).

General Procedural Law thus naturally acquires an even more place than in the classic branches of Law since on the one hand it imposes itself outside of trials, particularly in companies and on the other before the courts it involves people who had hardly any place to speak and thinks themselves, especially the systems entering the "causes" of Compliance now debated before the Judge.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Conclusion", in M. Boissavy, H. Dehghani-Azar, and M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Conseil national des Barreaux (CNB), Compliance, vigilance et médiation (Compliance, Vigilance and Mediation), Amphitheatre of the Conseil national des Barreaux, November 30, 2023.

____

🧮see the full programme of this event

________

♾️follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance et droit processuel" ("Compliance and Procedural Law"), in B. Deffains, M.-A. Frison-Roche and J.-B. Racine (dir.), Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and University Panthéon-Assas (Paris II), Compliance : Obligation, devoir, pouvoir, culture (Compliance : obligation, duty, power, culture), University Panthéon-Assas, Salle des Conseils, 14 June 2023.

____

🧮See the full programme of this event

____

🎤see the other speech made during the first day of this symposium : "L'obligation de compliance, entre volonté et consentement : obligation sur obligation vaut" ("Compliance Obligation, between will and consent: obligation on obligation works")  

____

► Summary of the conference: After referring to the chapter in the book Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, which deals more specifically with Procedural Law!footnote-2987, the conference is built around 5 developments, each of which represents a progression.

The first development relates to the fact that the relationship between Compliance Law and Procedural Law is very difficult because it is often said that they simply have nothing to do with each other, or that they have everything to dislike each other. This is because Compliance is often reduced to processes, and to the mechanical place that algorithms could take in it, in taking care of everything.

Compliance would even have the purpose and effect of ensuring that the company and its managers never come into contact with a judge, the public prosecutor being their best ally in this respect.

Secondly, I recalled the very common idea that Procedural Law is a kind of 'tribute' that the rule of Law demands, which certainly weighs down companies when compared with companies living in systems in which there's not not such a price.

But many stress that Procedural Law could become a model. This can be justified and technically anticipated because it has already happened in Regulation Law, and Compliance Law is the deployment of it!footnote-2988.

In the third stage, I worked on the alliance between the two, with the procedure (rather than the process) modifying compliance and thereby reinforcing it, evoking the way in which this can manifest itself technically!footnote-2989.

In the fourth step, I looked for what would be the "naturally appropriate procedure" for Compliance: one that takes into account the duration and the development of "solutions", to which the notion of "sustainability", which is central in the substantive Law of Compliance, refers.

In a fifth stage, and devoting more time to this, I have pointed out where innovation should be the strongest: the proof, the probatory obligation being the "part totale" ("total part") of the compliance obligation. This major issue will be the subject of a series of symposiums held in 2024.

________

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, série "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, 500 p. 

____

► This book in few words: Sanctions, controls, appeals, deals: judges and lawyers are everywhere in the Compliance mechanisms, creating unprecedented situations, sometimes without a solution yet available.  Even though Compliance was designed to avoid the judge and produce security by avoiding conflict. This jurisdictionalisation is therefore new. Forcing companies to prosecute and judge, a constrained role, perhaps against their nature. Leading to the adaptation of major procedural principles, with difficulty. Confronting arbitration with new perspectives. Putting the judge at heart, in mechanisms designed so that he is not there. How in practice to organize these opposites and anticipate the solutions? This is the challenge taken up by this book.

____

📘 In parallel, the English version of this book, Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, is published in the series co-published by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant. 

____

📅  This book comes after a  cycle of colloquia organised in 2021 by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and its Academic Partners.

____

This volume is the continuation of the books dedicated to Compliance in this collection.

► Read the presentations of the other books on Compliance in this collection:

• further books:

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

🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕L'obligation de compliance, 2024

🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche et M. Boissavy (ed.), 📕Compliance & droits de la défense. Enquête interne - CJIP - CRPC, 2023

• previous books :

🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📕 Les buts monumentaux de la Compliance, 2022

🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📕 Les outils de la Compliance, 2020

🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📕 Pour une Europe de la Compliance, 2019

🕴️N. Borga, N., 🕴️J.-Cl. Marin & 🕴️J.-Ch. Roda (ed.), 📕 Compliance : Entreprise, Régulateur, Juge, 2018

🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📕 Régulation, Supervision, Compliance, 2017

🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📕 Internet, espace d'interrégulation, 2016

📕 Read the presentations of the other titles of the collection.

____

► General presentation of the book: There have always been Judges and Lawyers in Compliance Law, because this branch of Law is an extension of Regulatory Law in which they have a core place. This results from the fact that the decisions taken in respect of Compliance are contestable in Court, including Arbitration, those issued by the Company, such as those of States or Authorities, the Judge in turn becoming what Compliance Law is effective.

The novelty lies more in the phenomenon of "jurisdictionalisation", that is the trial model penetrates all Compliance Law, and not only the Ex-Post part that it includes. Moreover, it seems that this jurisdictionalisation influences the non-legal dimension of Compliance. This movement has effects that must be measured and causes that must be understood. Advantages and disadvantages that must be balanced. If only to form an opinion vis-à-vis Companies that have become Prosecutors and Judges of themselves and others ...: encourage this "Jurisdictionalisation of Compliance", fight it, perhaps influence it? In any case, understand it!

___

🏗️ General construction of this book:

The book begins by a double Introduction, the first (in free access) summarizing the book, the second, substantial, relating to the need to reinforce the Judge and the Lawyer to impose the Compliance Law as a characteristic of the Rule of Law. 

The first Part is devoted to what is specific to Compliance Law. of Compliance: the transformation of companies into Prosecutors and Judges of themselves, even of others.

The second Part relates to Compliance general procedural Law, the procedure being the way between the dispute and the judgement. 

The third Part continues this journey to the judge and aims to measure the influence of the reasoning and requirements of Compliance Law in dispute resolution methods where it was not, with some exceptions, present, but where it has a great future: Arbitration.

Because trial and judicial decision are inseparable, because legal techniques and the Rule of Law should not be divided but compliance techniques could paradoxically be the weapon of their dissociation, because the power to judge and the procedures surrounding the latter must not be dissociated, because therefore Compliance mechanisms and the Rule of Law must be thought out and practiced then, the rise in power of one must be the sign of the rise in power of the other, and not the price of the 'weakening of the Rule of Law, the fourth Part relates to the Judges in the Compliance mechanisms and culture. 

____

DOUBLE INTRODUCTION

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Lignes de force de l'ouvrage La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance free access to the full text 

🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche, 📝Conforter le rôle du Juge et de l'Avocat pour imposer la Compliance comme caractéristique de l'État de Droit

I. L'ENTREPRISE INSTITUÉE PROCUREUR ET JUGE D'ELLE-MEME ET D'AUTRUI PAR LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE ("THE COMPANY ESTABLISHED PROSECUTOR AND JUDGE OF ITSELF AND OTHERS BY COMPLIANCE LAW")

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche,📝 Le "jugeant-jugé". Articuler les mots et les choses face à l'éprouvant conflit d'intérêts 

🕴️C. Granier, 📝Réflexions sur l'existence d'une jurisprudence des entreprises

🕴️L.-M. Augagneur, 📝La juridictionnalisation de la réputation par les plateformes

🕴️A. Bruneau, 📝L'entreprise juge d'elle-même : la fonction compliance dans la banque

🕴️J.-M. Coulon, 📝Le Droit de la Compliance dans le secteur d'activité de la construction et les contradictions, impossibilités et impasses auxquelles les entreprises sont confrontées

🕴️Lapp, Ch., 📝La compliance dans l'entreprise : les statuts du process

🕴️J. Heymann, 📝La nature juridique de la "Cour suprême" de Facebook

🕴️D. Latour, 📝Les enquêtes internes au sein des entreprises

🕴️A. Bavitot,  📝Le façonnage de l'entreprise par les accords de justice pénale négociée

🕴️S. Merabet, 📝La vigilance, être juge et ne pas juger

II. LE DROIT PROCESSUEL À L'OEUVRE DANS LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE  ("GENERAL PROCEDURAL LAW IN COMPLIANCE LAW")

🕴️N. Cayrol, 📝Des principes processuels en Droit de la Compliance

🕴️F. Ancel,📝Le principe processuel de compliance, un nouveau principe directeur du procès ?

🕴️B. Sillaman, 📝Secret professionnel et coopération : les leçons de procédure tirées de l’expérience américaine pour une application universelle

🕴️A. Linden, 📝Motivation et publicité des décisions de la formation restreinte de la Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL) dans une perspective de compliance

🕴️S. Scemla,🕴️D. Paillot, 📝La difficile appréhension des droits de la défense par les autorités de contrôle en matière de compliance

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Ajuster par la nature des choses du Droit processuel au Droit de la Compliance

III. L'ARTICULATION DE LA COMPLIANCE ET DE L'ARBITRAGE INTERNATIONAL ("ARTICULATION BETWEEN COMPLIANCE LAW AND INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION")

🕴️J.-B. Racine, 📝Compliance et Arbitrage. Essai de problématisation

🕴️E. Silva-Romero,🕴️R. Legru, 📝Quelle place pour la Compliance dans l'arbitrage d'investissement ?

🕴️C. Kessedjian, 📝L'arbitrage au service de la lutte contre la violation des droits de la personne humaine par les entreprises 

🕴️M. Audit, 📝La position de l'arbitre en matière de compliance

🕴️J. Jourdan-Marques, 📝L’arbitre, juge ex ante de la compliance ?

🕴️E. Kleiman, 📝Les objectifs de la compliance confrontés aux acteurs de l’arbitrage

🕴️F.-X. Train, 📝Arbitrage et procédure parallèles exercées au titre de la compliance

🕴️Cl. Debourg, 📝La compliance au stade du contrôle des sentences arbitrales

IV. LE JUGE DANS LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE ("THE JUDGE IN COMPLIANCE LAW")

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Le juge, l'obligation de compliance et l'entreprise. Le système probatoire de la Compliance

🕴️J. Morel-Maroger, 📝La réception des normes de la compliance par les juges de l'Union européenne

🕴️S. Schiller, 📝Un juge unique en cas de manquement international à des obligations de compliance ?

🕴️O. Douvreleur, 📝Compliance et juge du droit

🕴️F. Raynaud, 📝Le juge administratif et la compliance

🕴️E. Wennerström, 📝Quelques réflexions sur la Compliance et la Cour européenne des droits de l'Homme

________

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Conforter le rôle du Juge et de l'Avocat pour imposer la Compliance comme caractéristique de l'État de Droit" ("Reinforce the Judge and the Attorney to impose Compliance Law as a characteristic of the Rule of Law"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 29-55. 

____

► This article is the introduction of the book.  

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

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

____ 

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): One can understand that the compliance mechanisms are presented with hostility because they seem designed to keep the judge away, whereas there is no Rule of Law without a judge. Solid arguments present compliance techniques as converging towards the uselessness of the judge (I). Certainly, we come across magistrates, and of all kinds, and powerful ones, but that would be a sign of imperfection: its ex-ante logic has been deployed in all its effectiveness, the judge would no longer be required... And the lawyer would disappear so with him...

This perspective of a world without a judge, without a lawyer and ultimately without Law, where algorithms could organize through multiple processes in Ex Ante the obedience of everyone, the "conformity" of all our behaviors with all the regulatory mass that is applicable to us, supposes that this new branch of Law would be defined as the concentration of processes which gives full effectiveness to all the rules, regardless of their content. But supposing that this engineer's dream is even achievable, it is not possible in a democratic and free world to do without judges and lawyers.

Therefore, it is imperative to recognize their contributions to Compliance Law, related and invaluable contributions (II).

First of all, because a pure Ex Ante never existed and even in the time of the Chinese legists, people were still needed to interpret the regulations because a legal order must always be interpreted Ex Post by who must in any case answer the questions posed by the subjects of law, as soon as the political system admits to attributing to them the right to make claims before the Judge. Secondly the Attorney, whose office, although articulated with the Judge's office, is distinct from the latter, both more restricted and broader since he must appear in all cases where the judicial figure puts himself in square, outside the courts. However, Compliance Law has multiplied this since not only, extending Regulatory Law, it entrusts numerous powers to the administrative authorities, but it also transforms companies into judges, in respect of which the attorneys must deal with.

Even more so, Compliance Law only takes its sense from its Monumental Goals. It is in this that this branch of the Law preserves the freedom of human beings, in the digital space where the techniques of compliance protect them from the power of companies by the way that the Compliance Law forces these companies to use their power to protect people. However, firstly, it is the Judges who, in their diversity, impose as a reference the protection of human beings, either as a limit to the power of compliance tools or as their very purpose. Secondly, the Attorney, again distinguishing himself from the Judge, if necessary, reminds us that all the parties whose interests are involved must be taken into consideration. In an ever more flexible, soft, and dialogical Law, everyone presenting himself as the "advocate" of such and such a monumental goal: the Attorney is legitimate to be the first to occupy this place.

________

► Full Reference: F. Ancel, "Le principe processuel de compliance, un nouveau principe directeur du procès ?" (The procedural principle of compliance, a new trial leading principle?), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 225-230. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): Through this article, the author formulates a proposal: elevating the principle of compliance to the rank of leading principle of the trial. To support this, the author firstly emphasizes the convergence of the aims of compliance and the purpose of the trial. Indeed, emphasizing that Compliance Law does not oust either the State or the judge, as soon as compliance means that the person must keep their commitments and that the trial is also based on this principle that the parties must conform to the principles and to their own "speech", compliance thus becomes a trial leading principle.

In a second part of the article, the author illustrates his point in a very concrete way. First, the protocols of procedure which are drawn up by the courts and the bars are commitments which should justify a form of constraint which, if it should not have the same form and nature as that of the law, must all the same even have consequences when a party fails to do so. Secondly, relying on French case law which sanctions a party which had accepted the principle of an arbitration and then systematically hinders its implementation, the author suggests that under the principle of compliance can be grouped the notions for the instant scattered of loyalty, consistency (estoppel) and efficiency.

Thus, this "open practice" echoing the "open way" of a procedural principle of compliance brings out this one.

________

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le jugeant-jugé. Articuler les mots et les choses face à l'éprouvant conflit d'intérêts" ("The Judge-Judged. Articulating words and things in the face of the testing conflict of interest"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche, (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 59-80. 

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

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

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): Since the topic of this article is part of a chapter devoted to the Company established as Prosecutor and Judge of itself by Compliance Law, chapter aiming to use the relevant qualifications, it is appropriate therefore to worry about the adjustment of words and things, of the way in which the relationship between ones and the others evolve, and of the more particular question of knowing if this evolution is radical or not when one speaks of "judge ".

because "judging" is a word that the Law has disputed with other disciplines, but that it has appropriated not so much to confer more powers on those who act in its name, for example that who supervise and punish, but on the contrary to impose limits, since to the one who judges it has put the chains of the procedure under foot, thus making bearable for the other the exercise of such a power. Therefore, those who want the power to judge would often want to not have the title, because having de jure the title of judge is being subject to the correlated regime, it is to be submitted to procedural correctness.

It is therefore to better limit that the Law sees who judges, for obliging this so-powerful character to the procedure. But the Law also has the power to appoint a judge and to fix the contours of all the characters in the trial. He usually does it with clarity, distinguishing the ones of the others, not confusing them. This art of distinction has constitutional value. Thus, not only the one who judges must be named "judge" but the procedural apparatus which goes with this character, and which constitutes a way of doing things and fundamental rights, are not "granted" by kindness or in a second step: it is a block. If you didn't want to have to endure procedural rights, you didn't have to want to be a judge. Admittedly, one could conclude that the procedure would therefore have become "substantial"; by this elevation, it is rather a fashion of saying that the procedure would no longer be a "servant": it is a kind of declaration of love for the procedure, as long as one affirms that at the acts of judging , or investigating, or prosecuting, are "naturally" attached the procedural rights for the one who is likely to be the object of these powers.

Compliance Law, in search of allies to achieve the Monumental Goals for the aims of which it was instituted, will require, or even demand, private companies to go and seek themselves, in particular through investigations. internal or active vigilance on others, for finding facts likely to be reproached to them. Compliance Law will also require that they prosecute those who have committed these acts. Compliance La will again demand that they sanction the acts that people have committed in their name.

This is clearly understood from the point of view of Ex Ante efficiency. The confusion of roles is often very efficient since it is synonymous with the accumulation of powers. For example, it is more efficient that the one who pursues is also the one who instructs and judges, since he knows the case so well... Besides, it is more efficient that he also elaborates the rules, so he knows better than anyone the "spirit" of the texts. This was often emphasized in Regulatory Law. When everything is Information and risk management, that would be necessary ... But all this is not obvious.

For two reasons, one external and the other internal.

Externally, the first reason is that it is not appropriate to "name" a judge who is not. This would be too easy, because it would then be enough to designate anyone, or even to do it oneself to appropriate the regime that goes with it, in particular for obtain a so-called legitimate power for obtaining that others obey even though they are not subordinate or from them they transmit information, even though they would be  competitors: it would then be necessary to remember that only the Law is able to appoint judge ; in this new Compliance era, companies would be judges, prosecutors, investigators!  Maybe, if the Law says it, but if it didn't, it would be necessary to come back to this tautology ... But are we in such a radicalism? Moreover, do judges have "the prerogative" of judgment and the Law has not admitted this power for companies to judge for a long time? As soon as the procedure is there in Ex Ante and the control of the judge in Ex Post?

The second reason, internal to the company, situation on which the article focuses, is that the company investigates itself, judges itself, sanctions itself. However, the legal person expressing its will only through its organs, we underline in practice the difficulties for the same human being to formulate grievances, as he/she is the agent of the legal person, addressed to the natural person that he/she himself/herself is. The two interests of the two are not the same, are often opposed; how the secrets of one can be kept with respect to the other, represented by the same individual? ... It is all the mystery, even the artifice of legal personality that appears and we understand better that Compliance Law no longer wants to use this strange classical notion. Because all the rules of procedure cannot mask that to prosecute oneself does not make more sense than to contract with oneself. This conflict of interest is impossible to resolve because naming the same individual X then naming him/her Y, by declaring open the dispute between them does not make sense.

This dualism, which is impossible to admit when it comes to playing these functions with regard to corporate officers, can come back to life by setting up third parties who will carry secrets and oppositions. For example, by the designation of two separate lawyers for the human being agent and the human being representative of the legal person, each lawyer being able to have secrets for each other and to oppose each other. These spaces of reconstitution of the so "natural" oppositions in procedure between the one who judges and the one who is judged can also take the technological form of platforms: where there is no longer anyone, where the process has replaced the procedure, there is no longer any human judgment. We can thus see that the fear of conflicts of interest is so strong that we resign ourselves to saying that only the machine would be "impartial", a derisory conception of impartiality, against which it is advisable to fight.

This then leads to a final question: can the company claim to exercise the jurisdictional power to prosecute and judge and investigate without even claiming to be a prosecutor, an investigating judge, or a court? The company's advantage would be to be able to escape the legal regime that classical Law attaches to its words, mainly the rights of the defense and the rights of action for others, the principle of publicity of justice for everyone, which expresses the link between procedure and democracy. When Facebook said on June 12, 2021 "react" to the decision of May 5, 2021, adopted by what would only be an Oversight Board to decide "as a consequence" of a 2-year suspension of Donald Trump's account, the art of qualifications seem to be used in order to avoid any regime constraint.

But this art of euphemism is very old. Thus, the States, when they wanted to increase repression, presented the transformation of the system as a softening of it through the "decriminalization" of Economic Law, transferred from the criminal courts to the independent administrative agencies. The efficiency was greatly increased, since the guarantees of the Criminal Procedure ceased to apply. But 20 years later, Words found their way back to Things: under Criminal Law, slept the "criminal matter", which requires the same "Impartiality". In 1996, a judge once affirmed it and everything was changed. Let us therefore wait for what the Courts will say, since they are the masters of qualifications, as Article 12 of the French Code of Civil Procedure says, as Motulsky wrote it in 1972. Law has time.

________

► Full Reference: S. Schiller, "Un juge unique en cas de manquement international à des obligations de compliance ?" ("A single judge in the event of an international breach of compliance obligations?"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 453-464. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the author, translated by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): Given the very international nature of the topic apprehended, the actors involved and therefore the compliance disputes, it is essential to know if a person can be implicated before several judges, attached to different states or even if he can be condemned by several jurisdictions. The answer is given by the non bis in idem principle, which is the subject of a abondant case law on the basis of Article 4 of Protocol n°7 of the ECHR, clearly inapplicable for jurisdictions emanating from different States.

To assess whether breaches of compliance obligations may be subject to multiple sanctions in different states, it will first be necessary to ascertain whether there is a textual basis to be invoked.

At European level, Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights now allows the principle of ne bis in idem to be invoked. Applicable to all areas of compliance, it provides very strong protection which covers not only sanctions, but also prosecutions. Like its effects, the scope of Article 50 is very broad. The procedures concerned are those which have a repressive nature, beyond those pronounced by criminal courts in the strict sense, which makes it possible to cover the convictions pronounced by one of the many regulatory authorities competent in matters of compliance.

Internationally, the situation is less clear. Article 14-7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights may be invoked, if several obstacles are overcome, including the decision of 2 November 1987 of the Human Rights Committee which restricted it to the internal framework, requiring a double conviction by the same State.

Even if these principles are applicable, two specificities of compliance situations risk hampering their application, the first related to the applicable procedural rules, in particular the rules of jurisdiction, the second related to the specificities of the situation.

The application of the non bis in idem rule is only formally accepted with regard to universal jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction, that is to say extraterritorial jurisdiction, which is only part of the jurisdiction. . The Cour de cassation (French Judiciary Supreme Court) confirmed this in the famous so-called “Oil for food” judgment of March 14, 2018. The refusal to recognize this principle as universal, regardless of the jurisdiction rule in question, deprives French companies of a defense. Moreover, the repression of breaches of compliance rules is more and more often resolved through transactional mechanisms. The latter will not always fall within the scope of European and international rules laying down the non bis in idem principle, for lack of being sometimes qualified as "final judgment" under the terms of Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 14-7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Breaches in terms of compliance are often based on multiple acts. This results from prescriptions the starting point of which is delayed at the last event and a facilitated jurisdiction for French courts when only one of the constitutive facts is found in France. In terms of compliance, the non bis in idem principle therefore generally does not protect companies and does not prevent them from being sued before the courts of two different countries for the same case. It nevertheless grants them another protection by obliging them to take into account foreign decisions in determining the amount of the penalty. The sanction against Airbus SE in the Judicial Convention of Public Interest (CJIP) of January 29, 2020 is a perfect illustration of this.

Breaches in terms of compliance are often based on multiple acts. This causes delays in the starting point of prescriptions, starting point delayed at the last event, and this facilitates judicial jurisdiction for French courts when only one of the constitutive facts is found in France. In terms of compliance, the non bis in idem principle therefore generally does not protect companies and does not prevent them from being sued before the courts of two different countries for the same case. It nevertheless grants them another protection by obliging them to take into account foreign decisions in determining the amount of the penalty. The sanction against Airbus SE in the Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public -CJIP (French Judicial Convention of Public Interest)  of January 29, 2020 is a perfect illustration of this.

________

► Full Reference: N. Cayrol, "Des principes processuels en droit de la compliance" ("General Procedural Law in Compliance Law"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 213-224. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): We could be satisfied with examining the reception of the principles of general Procedural Law in compliance litigation and the distortion that compliance techniques justify in procedural mechanisms. But the innovation that constitutes this emerging branch of law that is Compliance Law justifies going to more fundamental.

From this perspective, the pertinent question is the very legitimacy of procedural principles in this branch of law, in that Procedural Law is built on the notion of “Litigation” while Compliance Law deals with situation so enormous, concerning for example the fate of the planet, that this notion of litigation appears inadequate, and consequently the procedural law would be too limited in compliance matters.

If, however, this perspective is maintained of Compliance Law facing, in an almost warlike perspective, the greatest current challenges, general Procedural Law needs to be redesigned, in its very definition. Indeed, compliance trials call into question the future of systems and it is as such that they hold the entities, for instance the enterprises, that are at the heart of these systems. It is in this that liability trials are more “accountability” trials, allowing the judge to demand actions for the future, trials by which commitments are made and the “intentions” of the persons involved are challenged and required.

________

► Full Reference: Ch. Lapp, "La compliance dans l'entreprise : les statuts du process" ("Compliance in the company: the statues of processes"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p.141-150. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► The summary below describes an article following the colloquium L'entreprise instituée Juge et Procureur d'elle-même par le Droit de la Compliance (The Entreprise instituted Judge and Prosecutor of itself by Compliance Law) , co-organized by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the Faculté de Droit Lyon 3. This manifestation was designed under the scientific direction of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche and Jean-Christophe Roda and took place in Lyon on June 23, 2021. During this colloquium, the intervention was shared with Jan-Marc Coulon, who is also a contributor in the book (see the summary of the Jean-Marc Coulon's  Article).

In the book, the article will be published in Title I, devoted to:  L'entreprise instituée Juge et Procureur d'elle-même par le Droit de la Compliance (The Entreprise instituted Judge and Prosecutor of itself by Compliance Law ).

____

► Summary of the article (done by the author): The Company is caught in the grip of Compliance Law, the jaws of which are those of Incitement (1) and Sanction that the Company must apply to ensure the effectiveness of its processes to which it is itself subject (2 ).

First, the Company has been delegated to fabricate reprehensible rules that it must apply to itself and to third parties with whom it has dealings. To this end, the Company sets up "processes", that is to say verification and prevention procedures, in order to show that the offenses that it is likely to commit will not happened.

These processes constitute standards of behavior to prevent and avoid that the facts constituting the infringements are not themselves carried out. They are thus one of the elements of Civil Liability Law in its preventive or restorative purposes.

Second, the sanction of non obedience of Compliance processes puts the Company in front of two pitfalls. The first  dimension place the company, with regard to its employees and its partners, in the obligation to define processes which also constitute the quasi-jurisdictional resolution of their non-compliance, the company having to reconcile the sanction it pronounces with the fundamental principles of classical Criminal Law, constitutional principles and all fundamental rights. The processes then become the procedural rule.

The second dimension is that the Company is accountable for the effectiveness of the avoidance by its processes of facts constituting infringements. By a reversal of the burden of proof, the Company is then required to prove that its processes are efficient. at least equivalent to the measures defined by laws and regulations, the French Anti-Corruption Agency (Agence Française Anticorruption - AFA), European directives and various communications on legal tools to fight breaches of probity, environmental attacks and current societal concerns. The processes then become the constitutive element, per se, of the infringement.

Thus, in its search for a balance between Prevention and Sanction to which it is itself subject, the Company will not then be tempted to favor the orthodoxy of its processes over the expectations of the Agence Française Anticorruption - AFA , regulators and judges, to the detriment of their efficiency?

In doing so, are we not moving towards an instrumental and conformist Compliance, paradoxically disempowering with regard to the Compliance Monumental Goals of Compliance?

________

► Full reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Ajuster par la nature des choses le Droit processuel au Droit de la Compliance" ("Adjusting by the nature of things General Procedural Law to Compliance Law"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 251-262. 

____

📝read the article (in French)

____ 

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

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► The principal elements of this articles had been presented during the scientific manifestation held on September 23, 2021, at Dauphine University in Paris, coorganised by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the Institute Droit Dauphine. 

In the book this article is placed in the chapter II about the General Procedural Law in the Compliance Law.  

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): Procedural law is an invention, essentially due to professor Motulsky, going well beyond the gain that one always has in comparing types of procedures with each other. As he asserted, there is Natural Law in General Procedural Law, in that as soon as there is the Rule of Law Principle there cannot be, whatever the "procedure", even the "process" such and such way of doing things: for example, to decide, to seize the one who decides, to listen before deciding, to contest the one who has decided.

General Procedural Law therefore depends on the nature of things. However, Compliance Law organizes things in a new way. Therefore, both the simple and iron principles of General Procedural Law creep in where we do not expect them at first sight, because there is no judge, this character around whom ordinary procedures fit together. The principles of General Procedural Law are essential in companies. Even if the regulations do not breathe a word about it, it is up to the Judges, in particular the Supreme Courts, to recognize this nature of things because on this effect of nature that  General Procedural Law is built: when compliance mechanisms oblige companies to strike, General Procedural law must oblige, even in the silence of the texts, to arm those who can be hit, even stand up against devices that would set aside too much these defenses that are easily considered contrary to efficiency (I).

But because it is a question of making room for this nature of the things of which the Rule of Law Principle entrusts the custody to the Judge and the Lawyer, the General Procedural Law must also adjust itself to what the extraordinary new branch of Law Compliance Law is. Indeed, Compliance Law is extraordinary in that it expresses the political pretention to act now so that the future will not be catastrophic, by detecting and preventing the realization of systemic risks, or even that it is better, by building effective equality or real concern for others. Because it is the Monumental Goals that defines this new branch of Law, a disputed systemic issue, possibly disputed by several parties before a judge, the procedural principles used by the court must be broadened considerably: they must then include civil society and the future (II).

General Procedural Law thus naturally acquires an even more place than in the classic branches of Law since on the one hand it imposes itself outside of trials, particularly in companies and on the other before the courts it involves people who had hardly any place to speak and thinks themselves, especially the systems entering the "causes" of Compliance now debated before the Judge.

________

♾️ suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

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

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, Automated Compliance, a pertinent tool for Compliance Law, the whole, document de travail, novembre 2022.

____

📝Ce document de travail sert de base à une participation à un débat sur "Automated Compliance : "the" solution or "a" solution?, qui déroule dans le Sommet global de Gaia-X  le 17 novembre 2022.  

____

►Résumé du document de travail : s'appuyant sur la présentation préalablement faite au débat par un membre de la Commission européenne, il s'agit de souligner trois éléments qui montrent que l' Automated Compliance (ou Compliance by design) est à la fois un outil central, mais qu'il n'est un outil du Droit de la Compliance dont il ne saurait remplir par sa seule performance technologique toutes les fonctions dans un Etat de Droit.

En premier lieu, l'Union européenne semble en difficulté lorsqu'elle veut tout à la fois bâtir un système juridique qui lui est propre sur la base de Lois dont chacune est la pièce d'un gigantesque puzzle pour obtenir une industrie pérenne et autonome dans une économie numérique mondiale totalement renouvelée, ce qui fait peser sur les entreprises une charge considérable d'intégration de toutes ces règles du jeu, tout en affirmant qu'il faut alléger la charge que la "réglementation" fait peser sur elles.

En second lieu, la meilleure solution pour résoudre cette ambition contradictoire est effectivement dans la technologique, les algorithmes intégrant directement les réglementations. Mais plus encore, l'ensemble de ces textes reposent sur une autonomie laissée en Ex Ante aux entreprises européennes pour s'organiser entre elles afin de concrétiser les "buts monumentaux" que l'Union européenne a décidé d'atteindre, dont la réalisation d'un cloud souverain est au centre.

Ainsi la distinction et l'articulation d'un "Droit de la Compliance", défini par ces "buts monumentaux", dont lequel l'intelligence artificielle est un outil, le "tout" (Compliance Law) et la "partie" (Automated Compliance) est essentielle.

En troisième lieu, cette distinction et articulation est non seulement bénéfice mais elle est obligatoire. En effet, même si le Droit de la Compliance constitue une branche du Droit, elle fonctionne dans le système juridique générale, qui ne fonctionne que par l'esprit des textes, les outils algorithmiques ne capturant que la lettre de ceux-ci. Ces tribunaux sont et seront au cœur du Droit de la Compliance, le cas Schrems l'a bien montré. C'est pourquoi la Technologie et le Droit doivent travailler ensemble, et davantage à l'avenir, notamment parce qu'un outil pour l'effectivité du Droit ne pourra jamais rendre compte de la vie même du système juridique.

________

🔓Lire ci-dessous les développements⤵️

► Full Reference: F. Ancel, "Compliance Law, a new guiding principle for the Trial?", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, coll. "Compliance & Regulation", to be published.  

____

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

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): Through this article, the author formulates a proposal: elevating the principle of compliance to the rank of leading principle of the trial. To support this, the author firstly emphasizes the convergence of the aims of compliance and the purpose of the trial. Indeed, emphasizing that Compliance Law does not oust either the State or the judge, as soon as compliance means that the person must keep their commitments and that the trial is also based on this principle that the parties must conform to the principles and to their own "speech", compliance thus becomes a trial leading principle.

In a second part of the article, the author illustrates his point in a very concrete way. First, the protocols of procedure which are drawn up by the courts and the bars are commitments which should justify a form of constraint which, if it should not have the same form and nature as that of the law, must all the same even have consequences when a party fails to do so. Secondly, relying on French case law which sanctions a party which had accepted the principle of an arbitration and then systematically hinders its implementation, the author suggests that under the principle of compliance can be grouped the notions for the instant scattered of loyalty, consistency (estoppel) and efficiency.

Thus, this "open practice" echoing the "open way" of a procedural principle of compliance brings out this one.

____

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

________

► Full Reference: F.-X. Train, "Arbitration and parallel proceedings exercised in Compliance Procedure", in M.-A. Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, series "Compliance & Regulation", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, to be published. 

___

► the summary below describes the article that follows an intervention in the scientific manifestation Compliance et Arbitrage, co-organised by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the University Panthéon-Assas (Paris II). This conference was designed by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche and Jean-Baptiste Racine, scientific co-directors, and took place in Paris II University on March 31, 2021. 

In the book, the article will be published in the Chapter III, devoted to: Compliance et Arbitrage international.

___

► Article Summary:  Firstly, the article insists on the principle of the autonomy of the international arbitration procedure, in relation to which parallel procedures remain watertight, whether they are criminal or done under Compliance Law. In the arbitral proceedings taking place independently, the arbitrators before whom the facts also referred to in these parallel proceedings, in particular the facts of corruption, are alleged before them as facts through their unlawful nature: it is at this title that they can and must apprehend them, using the standard of proof which is the bundle of clues.

Secondly, the article highlights the limits of the autonomy of international arbitration. These may be de facto limits because in the search for evidence by arbitrators, red flags are often insufficiently consistent evidence to establish a sentence, especially since this sentence may be subject to control by the judge of its conformity to international public order, the annulment by the judge being able to be based on external elements, even after the arbitration procedure. It may then be wise for the arbitrators, who are not forced to do so, to suspend their proceedings to wait the results of the parallel proceedings initiated under Compliance Law, so that the procedures and their results could be harmonious.

____

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

__________

►Référence complète : Cayrol, N., Procédure civile, 4ième éd., Coll. "Cours Dalloz-Série Droit privé", Dalloz, 2022, 569 p.

____

►Présentation de l'ouvrage : L'étude de la procédure civile est indispensable à tous les étudiants désireux d'embrasser une « carrière judiciaire » : magistrat, avocat, huissier, etc. Par nombre d'aspects, la procédure civile est bien, en effet, un droit professionnel, un droit à l'usage des professionnels du procès. La matière figure d'ailleurs aux épreuves des concours et examens d'accès à ces professions.

Mais la procédure civile n'est pas seulement un droit professionnel : elle traite de problèmes qui intéressent tous les juristes, quels qu'ils soient, qu'ils pratiquent ou non la procédure. La connaissance des notions procédurales de base est nécessaire pour la bonne compréhension de nombreuses questions de droit.

____

Lire la table des matières.

Lire la quatrième de couverture.

____

📚Voir l'ensemble des ouvrages de la même collection "Cours Dalloz -Série Droit privé", créée et dirigée par Marie-Anne Frison-Roche,

et notamment ceux qui traitent des branches du Droit interférant avec la Procédure civile :

📕  Procédure pénale

📕  Procédures civiles d'exécution

📕  Institutions juridictionnelles

_______

► Full Reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., coordination and moderation of the conference L'office du juge et les causes systémiques (""The Office of the Judge and systemic causes"), in Cycle of Conferences, Penser l'office du juge ("Thinking the Office of the Judge"), Grand Chamber of the Cour de cassation, Paris, May 9, 2021, 17h-19h.

The conference is held in French.

____

► General presentation of the conference: the conference is based on the intervention of three judges, Christophe Soulard, Fabien Raynaud, and François Ancel, who think and debate among themselves on a hypothesis: the existence of "systemic causes". The hypothesis is that beyond and through the diversity of disputes and cases that are submitted to the most diverse judges, there is a category of cases that are systemic, which means containing in what is submitted to the judge for resolution a system.  If such a category exists, which also raises the question of the diversity of systems and the difficulty arising from their submission to rules that are not legal (for example economic, biological, financial "laws", etc.) , then the judge should take this into account, both in the procedure and in the judgment they make on the case and in the way they formulate et restitute this judgment.

____

📝read the presentation of this conference by the Cour de cassation (in French)

📝read the program of the cycle of conferences 2022 (in French)

____

 🎥see the conference video (in French) 

🎥 see the synthesis video of the conference, made in situ by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche (in French)  

____

​✏️read the notes taken during the conference to make the synthesis (in French)

📝read the article of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche restituting this conference, published in the Recueil Dalloz (in French)

____

►read the works, basis of the two interventions of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

🚧 L'hypothèse de la "cause systémique (made before the conference to prepare it), available en English

📝Synthese of the conference (made during the conference)

________

► Full Reference: N. Cayrol, "Procedural Principles in Compliance Law", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, coll. "Compliance & Regulation", to be published. 

____

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

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): We could be satisfied with examining the reception of the principles of general Procedural Law in compliance litigation and the distortion that compliance techniques justify in procedural mechanisms. But the innovation that constitutes this emerging branch of law that is Compliance Law justifies going to more fundamental.

From this perspective, the pertinent question is the very legitimacy of procedural principles in this branch of law, in that Procedural Law is built on the notion of “Litigation” while Compliance Law deals with situation so enormous, concerning for example the fate of the planet, that this notion of litigation appears inadequate, and consequently the procedural law would be too limited in compliance matters.

If, however, this perspective is maintained of Compliance Law facing, in an almost warlike perspective, the greatest current challenges, general Procedural Law needs to be redesigned, in its very definition. Indeed, compliance trials call into question the future of systems and it is as such that they hold the entities, for instance the enterprises, that are at the heart of these systems. It is in this that liability trials are more “accountability” trials, allowing the judge to demand actions for the future, trials by which commitments are made and the “intentions” of the persons involved are challenged and required.

____

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

________

► Full Reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A, Reinforce the judge and the lawyer to impose Compliance Law as a characteristic of the Rule of Law, Working Paper, August 2021.

____

🎤 this working document has been made to prepare some elements of the opening intervention in the symposium Quels juges pour la Compliance) ? (Which judges for Compliance?), co-organized by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance and the Institut Droit Dauphine, held at the Paris Dauphine University on September 23, 2021, constituting the first part of the intervention.

____

📝it has been also the basis for an article: 

📕 published in its French version in the book La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in the collection📚Régulations & Compliance

 📘published in its English version in the book Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, in the collection 📚Compliance & Regulation

____

► Summary of the Working Paper: One can understand that the compliance mechanisms are presented with hostility because they seem designed to keep the judge away, whereas there is no Rule of Law without a judge. Solid arguments present compliance techniques as converging towards the uselessness of the judge (I). Certainly, we come across magistrates, and of all kinds, and powerful ones, but that would be a sign of imperfection: its ex-ante logic has been deployed in all its effectiveness, the judge would no longer be required... And the lawyer would disappear so with him...

This perspective of a world without a judge, without a lawyer and ultimately without Law, where algorithms could organize through multiple processes in Ex Ante the obedience of everyone, the "conformity" of all our behaviors with all the regulatory mass that is applicable to us, supposes that this new branch of Law would be defined as the concentration of processes which gives full effectiveness to all the rules, regardless of their content. But supposing that this engineer's dream is even achievable, it is not possible in a democratic and free world to do without judges and lawyers.

Therefore, it is imperative to recognize their contributions to Compliance Law, related and invaluable contributions (II).

First of all, because a pure Ex Ante never existed and even in the time of the Chinese legists📎!footnote-2689, people were still needed to interpret the regulations because a legal order must always be interpreted Ex Post by who must in any case answer the questions posed by the subjects of law, as soon as the political system admits to attributing to them the right to make claims before the Judge. Secondly the Attorney, whose office, although articulated with the Judge's office, is distinct from the latter, both more restricted and broader since he must appear in all cases where the judicial figure puts himself in square, outside the courts. However, Compliance Law has multiplied this since not only, extending Regulatory Law, it entrusts numerous powers to the administrative authorities, but it also transforms companies into judges, in respect of which the attorneys must deal with.

Even more so, Compliance Law only takes its sense from its Monumental Goals📎!footnote-2690. It is in this that this branch of the Law preserves the freedom of human beings, in the digital space where the techniques of compliance protect them from the power of companies by the way that the Compliance Law forces these companies to use their power to protect people. However, firstly, it is the Judges who, in their diversity📎!footnote-2691, impose as a reference the protection of human beings, either as a limit to the power of compliance tools📎!footnote-2692 or as their very purpose. Secondly, the Attorney, again distinguishing himself from the Judge, if necessary, reminds us that all the parties whose interests are involved must be taken into consideration. In an ever more flexible, soft and dialogical Law, everyone presenting himself as the "advocate" of such and such a monumental goal: the Attorney is legitimate to be the first to occupy this place.

🔓read the Working Paper developments below⤵️