All news

► Full Reference: M. Audit, "The arbitrator's position on compliance", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, coll. "Compliance & Regulation", 2024, pp. 319-333.  - 📘read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, in which this article is published - ► The summary below describes an 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 its Title III, devoted to: Compliance et Arbitrage. - ► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): For the arbitrator to intervene in matters of Compliance, a "Compliance Obligation" must exist. The identification of this specific obligation is tricky because it cannot generally be identified per se, if it is grasped only through Criminal Law, which does not enter directly into the field of Arbitration, which has developed an autonomous conception of the facts, in particular facts of corruption, which are also criminally reproachable. But because the obligation of compliance is itself autonomous, since it is a question of detecting and preventing various offenses and breaches, the arbitrators rely on the detection and prevention mechanisms as such, distinct from the possible behaviors that the Law wants they don't happen. But the question of the source of this compliance obligation is central because it must arise from a standard that can lead to Arbitration. This is the case of the contract, for example an intermediary contract which not only prohibits any corrupt practice but also provides for audit or control, or even the case of national laws, in particular the UK Bribery Act or the so-called French "Sapin 2" law, or even decisions imposing compliance programs or the unconstrained adoption of these by the company. According to its source, the arbitrator will take the Compliance obligation into account. If a Compliance obligation, having a source giving its significance in an Arbitration proceeding, is considered by the arbitrator to be breached, the consequences often depend on this source. The solution is classic if it is the lex contractus, more difficult if it is a Law which has inserted this obligation in the lex societatis, the requirements of compliance being generally considered as mandatory laws. If the arbitrators cannot apply the sanctions attached by the repressive law, they can support their decision in consideration of the breach found to assess the legality of a behavior or the validity of a contract, the ICC Rules for combating corruption being able to serve them as an analysis guide. - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses -

► Full Reference: E. Silva-Romero & R. Legru, "What place is there for compliance in investment arbitration?", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, coll. "Compliance & Regulation", 2024, pp. 305-317.   - 📘read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, in which this article is published   - ► The summary below describes an 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 Title III, devoted to: Compliance et Arbitrage. - ► Summary of the article: The authors emphasize the new and growing place of Compliance in International Arbitration, particularly in the requirement of respect for ethical values, since arbitrators can implement Ethics, sometimes lacking in international trade, or even must put their power only at the service of investors who respect the Rule of Law. Thus, Compliance is deployed through the classic control by the arbitrators of the legality of the investment, which applies both to the establishment of the treaty itself and to the investor. In a more recent way, the arbitrator can control about an investment project a sort of "social license to operate" of the investor, concept related to the social responsibility of the companies, appeared for the protection of the peoples indigenous. Moreover, Compliance can justify a substantial assessment by the arbitrator of the effective respect of the human rights and the environment protection via an investment treaty, the State party remaining able to act for the effectiveness of these concerns. - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses -

► 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, "Compliance & Regulation" Serie, 2024, pp. 273-28.  - 📝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 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

► Full Reference: F.-X. Train, "Arbitration and parallel proceedings exercised in Compliance Procedure", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (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 -

► 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", 2024, pp. 245-250.   - 📘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: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "The Judge, the Compliance Obligation and the Company. The Compliance Evidence System", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, coll. "Compliance & Regulation", 2024, pp. 359-395 - 📝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 - ► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance – JoRC): The article aims to identify the link that must be established between the company in its relationship with the compliance obligations it assumes and the judges to whom it is accountable in this respect: this link is established by evidence. The evidentiary system of proof has yet to be constructed, and it is the purpose of this long study to lay the groundwork.  To this end, the article begins with a description of what is designated here as the "probatory square" in a "probatory system" that is superimposed on the system of rules of substantive legal system. This is all the more important because Compliance seems to be in frontal collision in its very principles with the general principles of the evidentiary system, in particular because it seems that the company would have to prove the existence of the Law or that it would have to bear in a definitive way the burden of proving the absence of violation, which seems to be contrary not only to the presumption of innocence but also to the principle of the freedom of action and of undertaking. In order to re-articulate Compliance Law, the obligations of compliance which legitimately weigh on the company, it is necessary to return to the probatory system specific to Compliance, so that it remains within the Rule of Law. This presupposes the adoption of a substantial definition of Compliance, which is not only compliance with the rules, which is only a minimal dimension, but implies that Compliance Law should be defined by the Monumental Goals on which the public authorities and the companies are in substantial alliance. The evidentiary system of principle makes play between its four summits that are the burden of proof, the objects of proof this evidentiary square of principle, between the burden of proof, the means of proof and their admissibility. Compliance Law does not fall outside this evidential square, thus marking its full membership of the Rule of Law In order to lay the foundations of the evidential system specific to Compliance Law, the first part of the article identifies the objects of proof which are specific to it, by distinguishing between the structural devices, on the one hand, and the expected behaviours, on the other. The first involves proving that the structures required to achieve the Monumental Goals of Compliance have actually been put in place. The object of proof is then the effectiveness of this implementation, which presents the effectiveness of the system. As far as behavioral obligations are concerned, the object of proof is the efforts made by the company to obtain them, the principle of proportionality governing the establishment of this proof, while the systemic efficiency of the whole reinforces the evidential system. However, the wisdom of evidence lies in the fact that, even though the principle remains that of freedom of evidence, the company must establish the effectiveness, efficiency, and effectiveness of the whole, independently of the burden of proof. The second part of the article concerns those who bear the burden of proof in Compliance Law. The latter places the burden of proof on the company in principle, in view of its legal obligations. This burden comes from the legal origin of the obligations, which blocks the "round of the burden of proof". But in the interference of the different vertices of the evidentiary square, the question becomes more delicate when it comes to determining the contours of the compliance obligations that the company must perform. Moreover, the burden of proof may itself be the subject of proof, just as the company's performance of its legal obligations may also be the subject of contracts, which brings us back to the evidentiary system ordinarily applicable to contractual obligations. The situation is different when it comes to a "compliance contract" or when it comes to one or more compliance stipulations, concepts that are still not very well developed in Contract Law.  Furthermore, as all branches of Law belong to a legal system governed by the Rule of Law, other branches of law interfere and modify the methods and solutions of proof. This is the case when the fact, which is the object of proof, can give rise to a sanction, the Law of repression imposing its own solutions in the matter of the burden of proof.  In the third part of the article, the relevant means of proof in Compliance Law are examined, used in that Compliance Law is above all a branch of Law whose object is on the one hand information and on the other hand the Future. Open questions remain, such as whether companies could be forced by the Judge to build technologies to invent new means of proof. To show that they are indeed achieving the Monumental Goals they are charged with.  In the fourth part, the vital character of the pre-constitution of evidence is shown, which is the reflection of the Ex-Ante nature of Compliance Law: evidence must be pre-constituted to avoid the very prospect of having to use it, by finding all the means to establish the effectiveness, efficiency and even the effectiveness of the various Compliance Tools.  If companies do all this methodically, the Compliance evidence system will be established, in harmony with the general evidence system, Compliance Law and the Rule of Law. - - 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

► Full Reference: F. Raynaud, "The administrative judge and compliance", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, coll. "Compliance & Regulation", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, 2024, pp. 433-439  - 📘read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, in which this article is published - ► Summary of the article: -

► Full Reference: S. Merabet, "Vigilance, being a judge and not judge", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, "Compliance & Regulation" Serie, 2024, pp. 217-228 - 📘read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, in which this article is published - ► Summary of the article: - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses -

► Full Reference: D. Latour, "Internal investigations within companies", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation,  Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, "Compliance & Regulation" Serie, 2024, pp. 183-201 - 📘read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, in which this article is published - ► Summary of the article ():  - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses -

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Main Aspects of the Book. Compliance Jurisdictionalisation", in M.-A. Frison-Roche, (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, "Compliance & Regulation" Serie, 2024, pp. 11-38 - 📝This article constitutes the first part of the Introduction of the book; its access is free - 📘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 – JoRC) : This free access article ⤵️ explains firstly the general purpose of the book and secondly how the book is structured in 4 chapters. Then, thirdly and following the table of contents, this article takes up in a few lines each of the contributions. This is how the "main aspects" of the book Compliance Jurisdictionalisation become even clearer - 🔓read this article in full text⤵️ - 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, "Compliance & Regulation" Serie, 2024, 464 p. - ► General presentation of the book: 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. - ► Summary of the book: There have always been Judges and Lawyers in Compliance Law, in particular 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 to say that 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 the book:The book opens with a double Introduction. The first, which is freely accessible, consists of a summary of the book, while the second, which is substantial, deals with the need to bring the Judge and the Lawyer into line if Compliance Law is to be the hallmark of States governed by the Rule of Law. The first Chapter is devoted to what is specific to Compliance Law: the transformation of companies into Prosecutors and Judges of themselves, and even of others. The second Chapter examines the interference between General Procedural Law and Compliance techniques. The third Chapter measures the influence of the reasoning and requirements of Compliance Law in methods of dispute resolution where it has not, with a few exceptions, been present, but where it has a great future: arbitration. Because trials and judgements are indissociable, because legal techniques and the Rule of Law must not be dissociated, and because Compliance techniques could paradoxically be the weapon used to dissociate them, because the power to judge and the procedures surrounding it must not be dissociated, because Compliance and the Rule of Law must therefore be conceived and practised together, the rise in power of one being a sign of the rise in power of the other, and not the price of the weakening of the Rule of Law, the fourth Chapter deals with the role of the Judge in Compliance. - TABLE OF CONTENTS   DOUBLE INTRODUCTION 🕴️​M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Main Aspects of the book Compliance Jurisdictionalisation 🕴️​M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Reinforce the Judge and the Lawyer to impose Compliance Law as a characteristic of the Rule of Law    I. THE COMPANY ESTABLISHED PROSECUTOR AND JUDGE OF ITSELF BY COMPLIANCE LAW 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝The "Judge-Judged". Articulating Words and Things in the face of Conflicts of Interest 🕴️C. Granier, 📝Reflections on the existence of companies’ jurisprudence through Compliance matters 🕴️L.-M. Augagneur, 📝The jurisdictionalisation of reputation by platforms 🕴️A. Bruneau, 📝The compagny judges itself: the Compliance function in the bank 🕴️J.-M. Coulon, 📝Compliance Law in the construction industry and the contradictions, impossibilities and. deadlocks that companies face 🕴️Ch. Lapp, 📝Compliance in companies: the statues of process 🕴️J. Heymann, 📝The Legal Nature of the Facebook "Supreme Court" 🕴️D. Latour, 📝Internal investigations within companies 🕴️A. Bavitot, 📝Shaping the company through negotiated Criminal Justice Agreements. French perspective 🕴️S. Merabet, 📝Vigilance, being a judge and not judge   II. PROCEDURAL LAW IN COMPLIANCE LAW 🕴️​N. Cayrol, 📝Procedural Principles in Compliance Law 🕴️F. Ancel, 📝Compliance Law, a new guiding principle for the Trial? 🕴️B. Sillaman, 📝Taking the Compliance U.S. Procedural Experience globally 🕴️A. Linden, 📝Motivation and publicity of the decisions of the Restricted formation of the French Personal Data Protection Authority (Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertés – CNIL) in a compliance perspective 🕴️S. Scemla, & 🕴️D. Paillot, 📝The difficulty for Compliance Enforcement Authorities to comprehend the Rights of the Defence in compliance matters 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Adjusting General Procedural Law to Compliance Law by the nature of things   III. ARTICULATION BETWEEN COMPLIANCE LAW AND INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 🕴️J.-B. Racine, 📝Compliance and arbitration. An attempt at problematisation 🕴️E. Silva-Romero & 🕴️R. Legru, 📝What place is there for compliance in investment arbitration? 🕴️​M. Audit, 📝The arbitrator's position on compliance 🕴️E. Kleiman, 📝The objectives of compliance confronted with the actors of arbitration   IV. THE JUDGE IN COMPLIANCE LAW 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝The Judge, the Compliance Obligation and the Company. The Compliance Evidence System 🕴️J. Morel-Maroger, 📝The application of compliance standards by European Union judges  🕴️S. Schiller, 📝A single judge in the event of an international breach of compliance obligations? 🕴️O. Douvreleur, 📝Compliance and Judge of the Law 🕴️F. Raynaud, 📝The Administrative Judge and Compliance 🕴️E. Wennerström, 📝Some Reflections on Compliance and the European Court of Human Rights - 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

► Full Reference : J.-D. Pellier, Droit de la consommation (Consumer Law), 4th ed., 2024, Lefebvre-Dalloz, “Cours Dalloz-Série Droit privé” Series, 512 p. - ► General presentation of the book (written in French) : We experience Consumer Law every day. It also expresses a new way of conceiving civil law, commercial law, criminal law and public law. These are many reasons to learn and understand « Consumer Law » thanks to this clear and up-to-date textbook. The book first describes the « contractual » rules of consumer law, whether drawn from the general law or from the special law of consumption, then devotes a second part to the procedural rules of the subject, so abundant are the disputes in this field, whether collective or individual. The texts and specific solutions are rooted in commercial law and competition law as well as in criminal law, consumer law developing more and more at the level of European Union Law. The book restores the unity of the subject out of this diversity, for it is always the protection of consumers that is at stake. - 📕Read the back cover (in French) - 📕Read the table of contents (in French) - 📚See the entire collection in which the book is published. -

► Full Reference : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Conclusion. Compliance et contrats publics : une alliance naturelle" ("Conclusion. Compliance and Public Contracts: a natural alliance"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche, C. Gilles & A. Oumedjkane (dir.), Compliance et contrats publics (Compliance and public contracts), Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC), Centre de recherches et d’études administratives de Montpellier (CREAM) and Centre d’Études et de Recherches Comparatives Constitutionnelles et Politiques (CERCOP) of the Montpellier University, Faculté de droit et de science politique de Montpellier, 39 rue de l’Université, Amphiteatre C Paul Valéry, January 12, 2024 - 🧮see the full programme of this event - ✏️read the notes taken on the spot to draw up the symposium conclusion - 🌐consult on LinkedIn a general presentation of this event, which links to a presentation of each speech (in French) - 🧱consult the co-organisation sheet of this event, giving an account of the various speakers - ► English Summary of the conference: Firstly, it would appear that, as with all the contracts studied in the area of Compliance, public contracts are, for the public authorities or public companies, an instrument through which they implement the Compliance Obligation imposed on them by the laws and regulations. Public bodies involved in public contracts are particularly concerned because of the points of contact, even intimacy, between Compliance Law and the general interest. But the contract, whether public or private, remains in its classic conception what results from the expression of two wills which exchange their consents📎¹🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🚧Compliance contract, Compliance clauses, 2022..   Secondly, in terms of free will, public contracts can be the means by which public bodies and their co-contractors express their conception of what needs to be done to preserve the future, for example in environmental and social matters. On the contrary, the seemingly technical issue of exclusions from public contracts, whether they be automatic exclusions or optional exclusions, expresses the extent to which economically powerful players (public authorities, municipalities, public companies) take care of each other. In this respect, Compliance Law runs counter to Competition Law📎²🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🚧Competition Law and Compliance Law, 2018. and profoundly affects Public Procurement Law.   But thirdly, the public contract, in that it expresses the general interest by its very nature, its ex ante nature reinforces regulatory action and the nature of Compliance as an extension of Regulation📎³🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Régulation, Supervision, Compliance (Regulation, Supervision, Compliance), 2017.. It appears to be the most appropriate instrument for this new branch of Law, without the need for it to be transformed. This underlines the extent to which Compliance Law must draw on classical Law, in this case Administrative Law.   Moreover, fourthly, the public contract appears to be the model for the Compliance Contract. The public contract is a model first of all because of the central place of the general interest. The "Monumental Goals" in which the substantive definition of  Compliance Law is anchored📎⁴🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Compliance Monumental Goals, beating heart of Compliance Law, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Monumental Goals, 2022. are a development of this. Admittedly, this concern for the general interest drives the public entity, but the "raison d'être" of companies more generally also incorporates it through "governance", profoundly renewed by Compliance. The public contract is also a model because the contract is handled by a powerful party, in this case the public entity. The subject of Compliance Law is the powerful company, and only that company, chosen because it is powerful and because it uses that power to achieve the Monumental Goals. In this respect, the "exorbitant powers" that characterise the public contractor are reconstituted either by Compliance laws or by stipulations, which confer on all obliged or voluntary companies – by virtue of CSR, which has many points of contact with Compliance Law as long as it is not confused with obeying the applicable regulations (which is what "conformity" is)📎⁵🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Reinforce the Judge and the Lawyer to impose Compliance Law as a characteristic of the Rule of Law, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, 2023. – a power over the co-contractor, or even over third parties, equivalent to that of the public entity📎⁶🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🚧Use of private companies by Compliance Law to serve Human Rights, 2023..  The judge is the one who, through contractual litigation, both public and private, will bring to life these Monumental Goals desired by the State, carried by powerful entities (administration, companies), pledge of the Rule of Law📎⁷🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Reinforce the Judge and the Lawyer to impose Compliance Law as a characteristic of the Rule of Law, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, 2023.. These include contractual mechanisms for information, audit, disclosure, control, collaboration, supervision, etc., through which the company, whether private or public, takes charge of the structure it has created, for example the value chain it masters📎⁸🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Assessment of whistleblowing and the obligation of vigilance regarding International Competitiveness, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Monumental Goals, 2022..   It can therefore be concluded that this logic of a public contract as an instrument of administrative action to achieve goals of general interest, now fully taken up in Compliance Law, must be acculturated into the Ordinary Contract Law and must be preserved in Public Contract Law, which presupposes a new balance with Competition Law, which for a long time carried within Public Law a contract model without concern for sustainability or the collective interest. To achieve this, dialogue between judges is essential. The Conseil d'État (French Council of State) and the Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation) set the example📎⁹Conseil d'État (French Council of State) and Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation), 📗Du droit de la régulation au droit de la compliance : quel rôle pour le juge ?, La Documentation Française, 2024 (to be published).. - 📝This conference will be followed by an article, "The public contract, model of the Compliance Contract", which will be published in the book 📘Compliance and contract. - 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, C. Gilles and A. Oumedjkane (dir.), Compliance et contrats publics (Compliance and public contracts), Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC), Centre de recherches et d’études administratives de Montpellier (CREAM) and Centre d’Études et de Recherches Comparatives Constitutionnelles et Politiques (CERCOP) of the Montpellier University, Faculté de droit et de science politique de Montpellier, January 12, 2024 - 🌐consult a general presentation of this event on LinkedIn, linking to a presentation of each speech (in French) - 🏗️This symposium takes place in the cycle of symposiums organised by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and its partners Universities, focusing in 2023-2024 on the general theme of the Compliance Obligation - 📚The works will then be inserted in the books:  📕Compliance et contrat, to be published in the 📚Régulations & Compliance Serie, co-published by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, published in French. 📘Compliance & Contract, to be published on the 📚Compliance & Regulation Serie, co-published by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, published in English. - ► General presentation of the symposium: Compliance is developing throughout the legal system, through both Public and Private Law techniques. Public Contract Law bears witness to this in two ways: through its scope, in that Compliance applies to economic relationships entered into by public bodies, and through its object, which internalises a reconciliation between their economic interests and a set of other general interest objectives, or "Monumental Goals", a reconciliation for which public bodies have traditionally been responsible. In addition to unilateral acts, contracts have their rightful place as a practical means of achieving this reconciliation. Its flexibility allows for negotiation and adjustment of the burdens to be placed on the co-contracting parties. The aim of this symposium is to link the different manifestations of the Compliance Obligation in public contracts and thus give coherence to policies which are still too often considered in a watertight manner because they relate to very different aims and areas. Firstly, at the procurement stage, the promotion of responsible or innovative procurement, particularly from an environmental point of view, is one of the signs of Compliance's presence. On a completely different note, the same is true of the CJEU's challenge to the automatic application of bans on tendering, which prevent contracting authorities from ruling on a candidate's reliability by taking into account the compliance programmes implemented by companies since their conviction. Secondly, at the litigation stage, the Conseil d'État's (French Council of State) recent broad recognition of the illegality of an administrative contract on the grounds of a breach of ethical obligations has tempered the drive to make contracts more secure, drawing the consequences of the major drive for transparency in public life that has been underway since 2013. The aim of the morning session will be to understand the various forms of the Compliance Obligation in public contracts. This overview will make it possible, in the afternoon, to aim to unify the Compliance Obligation in public contracts. - - ► Speakers:  🎤Ugo Assouad, PhD student at the Montpellier University, CREAM 🎤Philippe Augé, President of the Montpellier University 🎤Clémence Ballay-Petizon, PhD student at the Montpellier University, CREAM  🎤Yannisse Benrahou, PhD student at Paris-Nanterre University, CRDP 🎤Léon Boijout, PhD student at the Montpellier University, CREAM 🎤Julien Bonnet, Full Professor at the Montpellier University, CERCOP 🎤Guylain Clamour, Dean of the Montpellier Faculty of Law and Political Science 🎤Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Professor of Regulatory and Compliance Law, Director of the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) 🎤Pierre-Yves Gadhoun, Professor at the Montpellier University, CERCOP 🎤Pascale Idoux, Professor at the at the Montpellier University, CREAM 🎤Nedjma Kontoukas, PhD student at the Montpellier University, CREAM 🎤Valentin Lamy, Senior Lecturer at the Lorraine University, IRENEE 🎤Antoine Oumedjkane, Senior Lecturer at Lille University, ERDP 🎤Lucien Rapp, Emeritus Professor at Toulouse Capitole University 🎤Marion Ubaud-Bergeron, Full Professor at the Montpellier University, CREAM  - 🧮Read a detailed presentation of the event below⤵️ - 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Coordination of the cycle of conference-debates Contentieux Systémique Émergent (Emerging Systemic Litigation), organised on the initiative of the Cour d'appel de Paris (Paris Cour of Appeal), with the Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation), the Cour d'appel de Versailles (Versailles Court of Appeal), the École nationale de la magistrature – ENM (French National School for the Judiciary) and the École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris – EFB (Paris Bar School), under the scientific direction of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche - ► This Cycle in few words: Duty of vigilance, supervision of platforms, non-financial information (CSRD), etc.: as many new texts that bring new types of disputes before the courts. Despite their diversity, the cases brought before the most diverse judges present a unity: through the dispute that pits the parties against each other, it is a system that is at stake, for example the climate system, digital system, energy system, financial system, etc. New regulations are just the illustration of this "Emerging Systemic Litigation"; the conference-debates aiming at showing the new fields, new techniques, new standards, etc., in relation to the scale and diversity of stakeholders' expectations. This cycle is designed to encourage cross-fertilisation, so as to provide judges with food for thought ahead of the litigation they will be called upon to deal with. Les réglementations nouvelles ne sont que l’illustration de ce « contentieux systémique émergent » dont la formation a pour objet de montrer les nouveaux champs, les nouvelles techniques, les nouvelles normes, etc., en lien avec l’ampleur et la diversité des attentes des parties prenantes. Le cycle vise à favoriser les échanges croisés, afin d’alimenter la réflexion des magistrats en amont des litiges qui leurs seront soumis. - 🔴Registrations and information requests can be sent to: inscriptionscse@gmail.com 🔴For the attorneys, registrations have to be sent to the following address: https://evenium.events/cycle-de-conferences-contentieux-systemique-emergent/  ⚠️The conference-debates are held in person only, in the Cour d’appel de Paris (Paris Court of Appeal). - ► General Presentation of the Cycle: In 2024, the Cour d’appel de Paris (Paris Court of Appeal) created a new specialised chamber: chamber 5-12 Contentieux émergent – Devoir de vigilance et responsabilité écologique (Emerging litigation – Duty of vigilance and environmental liability). Vigilance litigation is an example of what is emerging more generally: Systemic Litigation, often linked to technologies. This calls for a new way of judging, organising procedures and relations between professionals. A series of conference-debates on Emerging Systemic Litigation (ESL) is being organised jointly by the Paris Court of Appeal, the Versailles Court of Appeal, the Cour de cassation (French Court of cassation), the École nationale de la magistrature – ENM (French National School for the Judiciary) and the École de formation des barreaux du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Paris – EFB (Paris Bar School), under the scientific responsibility of Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche. In this context, a series of conference-debates involving professionals from a wide range of backgrounds is being proposed on the following themes: 🧮the very notion of "Emerging Systemic Litigation" and the role of the judiciary in it (29 March 2024): read the report of this event   🧮vigilance, insofar as it gives rise to Systemic Litigation, notably because it takes legal form in numerous contracts, for example in employment relationships (26 April 2024): read the report of this event   🧮the inclusion in Emerging Systemic Litigation of information reliability techniques, particularly with regard to content available on platforms (27 May 2024): read the report of this event   🧮the way in which artificial intelligence is generating Systemic Litigation and the influence of new specific texts (24 June 2024): read the report of this event   🧮sustainability, a principle of systems found in reports and transitively in disputes concerning their development, their standards and even their control (9 September 2024): read the programme of this event   🧮new evidentiary techniques required by Emerging Systemic Litigation, to account for systemic needs, e.g. climate and digital systems, and how firms respond to them (14 October 2024): read the programme of this event   🧮Vigilance General Procedural Law, in that it incorporates the Systemic dimension of Vigilance Litigation (18 November 2024): read the programme of this event   🧮institutional and case law feedback from courts on Emerging Systemic Litigation (16 December 2024): read the programme of this event - 🧮read below the full programme of this cycle of conference-debates⤵️