Resources

Articles in The Journal of Regulation & Compliance « JoRC »

SILLAMAN, Bryan🕴️

📝Taking the Compliance U.S. Procedural Experience globally, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation

► Full Reference:  B. Sillaman, "Taking the Compliance U.S. Procedural Experience globally", 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): The French legal system is evolving, organizing interaction between lawyers with regulators and prosecutors, specially in investigations about corruption or corporate misconduct, adopting U.S. negotiated resolutions such as the Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public, which encourages "collaboration" between them.  The author describes the evolution of the U.S. DOJ doctrine and askes French to be inspired by the U.S. procedural experience, U.S. where this mechanism came from. Indeed, the DOJ released memoranda about what the "collaboration" means. At the end (2006 Memorandum), the DOJ has considered that the legal privilege must remain intact when the information is not only factual in order to maintain trust between prosecutors, regulators and lawyers. French authorities do not follow this way. The author regrets it and thinks they should adopt the same reasoning as the American authority on the secret professionnel of the avocat, especially when he intervenes in the company internal investigation. - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses -

Articles in a legal collective publication

DEFFAINS, Bruno👤

📝 Compliance and International Competitiveness, in Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📘Compliance Monumental Goals

► Full Reference: Deffains, B., Compliance and International Competitiveness, in Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), Compliance Monumental Goals, series "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, to be published. - ► Article Summary: Compliance, which can be defined first and foremost as obedience to the law, is an issue for the company in that it can choose as a strategy to do or not to do it, depending on what such a choice costs or brings in. This same choice of understanding is offered to the author of the norm, the legislator or the judge, or even the entire legal system, in that it makes regulation more or less costly, and compliance with it, for companies. Thus, when the so-called “Vigilance” law was adopted in 2017, the French Parliament was criticized for dealing a blow to the “international competitiveness” of French companies. Today, it is on its model that the European Parliament is asking the European Commission to design what could be a European Directive. The extraterritoriality attached to the Compliance Law, often presented as an economic aggression, is however a consubstantial effect, to its will to claim to protect beyond the borders. This brings us back to a classic question in Economics: what is the price of virtue? In order to fuel a debate that began several centuries ago, it is first of all on the side of the stakes that the analysis must be carried out. Indeed, the Law of Compliance, which is not only situated in Ex Ante, to prevent, detect, remedy, reorganize the future, but also claims to face more “monumental” difficulties than the classical Law. And it is specifically by examining the new instruments that the Law has put in place and offered or imposed on companies that the question of international competitiveness must be examined. The mechanisms of information, secrecy, accountability or responsibility, which have a great effect on the international competitiveness of companies and systems, are being changed and the measure of this is not yet taken. - 📘  lire la présentation générale du livre, Compliance Monumental Goals, dans  lequel cet article est publié -

Articles in a legal collective publication

POTTIER, Stanislas🕴️

📝In Favour of European Compliance, a Vehicle of Economic and Political Assertion, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Monumental Goals

► Full Reference: S. Pottier, "In Favour of European Compliance, a Vehicle of Economic and Political Assertion", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Monumental Goals, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, "Compliance & Regulation" Serie, 2023, pp. 459-468 - 📘read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Monumental Goals, in which this article is published - ► Summary of the article (donne by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance – JoRC): Today's monumental goals, particularly environmental and climatic ones, are of a financial magnitude that we had not imagined but the essential stake is rather in the way of using these funds, that is to determine the rules which, to be effective and fair, should be global. The challenge is therefore to design these rules and organize the necessary alliance between States and companies. It is no longer disputed today that the concern for these monumental goals and the concern for profitability of investments go hand in hand, the most conservative financiers admitting, moreover, that concern for others and for the future must be taken into account, the ESG rating and the "green bonds" expressing it. Companies are increasingly made more responsible, in particular by the reputational pressure exerted by the request made to actively participate in the achievement of these goals, this insertion in the very heart of the management of the company showing the link between compliance and the trust of which companies need, CSR also being based on this relationship, the whole placing the company upstream, to prevent criticism, even if they are unjustified. All governance is therefore impacted by compliance requirements, in particular transparency. Despite the global nature of the topic and the techniques, Europe has a great specificity, where its sovereignty is at stake and which Europe must defend and develop, as a tool for risk management and the development of its industry. Less mechanical than the tick the box, Europe makes the spirit of Compliance prevail, where the competitiveness of companies is deployed in a link with States to achieve substantial goals. For this, it is imperative to strengthen the European conception of compliance standards and to use the model. The European model of compliance arouses a lot of interest. The duty of vigilance is a very good example. It is of primary interest to explain it, develop it and promote it beyond Europe. -

Articles in The Journal of Regulation & Compliance « JoRC »

DOUVRELEUR, Olivier🕴️

📝 Compliance and Judge ruling only on points of Law, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation

► Full Reference: O. Douvreleur,  "Compliance and Judge ruling only on points of Law", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, series "Compliance & Regulation", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, to be published.  - ► Article Summary (done by the Journal of Regulation): Compliance maintains with the judge complex relations, and even more with the judge ruling only on points of Law  (in France, the Court de Cassation in the judicial order, the one who, in principle, does not know the facts that he leaves to the sovereign appreciation of the judges ruling on the substance of the disputes. At first glance, compliance is a technique internalised in companies and the place occupied by negotiated justice techniques leave little room for intervention by the judge ruling only on points of Law However, his role is intended to develop, in particular with regard to the duty of vigilance or in the articulation between the different branches of Law when compliance meets Labor Law, or even in the adjustment between American Law and the other legal systems, especially French legal system. The way in which the principle of Proportionality will take place in Compliance Law is also a major issue for the judge ruling only on points of Law. -   📘 read the general presentation of the book, Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, in which this article is published   -      

Monographs

AKMAN, Pinar🕴️

📝Regulating Competition in Digital Platform Markets : A Critical Assessment of the Framework and Approach of the EU Digital Markets Act

► Full Reference: P. Akman, "Regulating Competition in Digital Platform Markets : A Critical Assessment of the Framework and Approach of the EU Digital Markets Act", (2022) 47 European Law Review 85, available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3978625 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3978625 - ► Summary of the article (made by the authors): "The European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) initiative, which is set to introduce ex ante regulatory rules for “gatekeepers” in online platform markets, is one of the most important pieces of legislation to emanate from Brussels in recent decades. It not only has the potential to influence jurisdictions around the world in regulating digital markets, it also has the potential to change the business models of the wealthiest corporations on the planet and how they offer their products and services to their customers. Against that backdrop, this article provides an analysis of the aims of and principles underlying the DMA, the essential components of the DMA, and the core substantive framework, including the scope and structure of the main obligations and the implementation mechanisms envisaged by the DMA. Following this analysis, the article offers a critique of the central components of the DMA, such as its objectives, positioning in comparison to competition law rules, and substantive obligations. The article then provides recommendations and proposes ways in which the DMA – and other legislative initiatives around the world, which may take the DMA as an example – can be significantly improved by, inter alia, adopting a platform-driven substantive framework built upon self-executing, prescriptive obligations.". - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses -

Jurisprudence

Cour d'Appel de Paris (Paris Court of Appeal)

Decision of 11th of February 2021, Veolia v. Suez

Full reference: Cour d'appel de Paris, Pole 5 – chamber 7, 11th of February 2021, Veolia/Suez, n° 20/13807

Articles in a legal collective publication

BONNET, Julien🕴️

📝 The crisis, an opportunity to seize Compliance as a mode of Communication by Public Authorities, in Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), “Compliance Monumental Goals”

► Full Reference: Bonnet, J., The crisis, an opportunity to seize Compliance as a mode of Communication by Public Authorities, in Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), Compliance Monumental Goals, Journal of Regulation & Compliance and Bruylant, to be published.    Article Summary (done par the author) :  Based on the French case of the ban on cycling during the health crisis issued by a simple ministerial tweet, the analysis aims to broaden the reflection on the consequences of the intensive and precious use of communication tools by public authorities. Because of the consequences and above all the risks for the legitimacy of the State and the law, public authorities could draw inspiration from the spirit and methods of compliance in order to produce communication and action that are both more effective, clearer, more in accordance with the law, all without renouncing the flexibility of the communicational means and incentive actions.   -   📘 Go to the general presentation of the book in which this article will be published. 

Articles in a legal collective publication

BAR-BOUYSSIERE, Bertold👤

📝 Practical obstacles to the effective place of Proportionality in Compliance, in 📘Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), “Compliance Monumental Goals”

► Full Reference: Bär-Bouyssière, B., Practical obstacles to the effective place of Proportionality in Compliance, in Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.),Compliance Monumental Goals, series "Compliance & Regulation", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, to be published. - ► Article Summary:  The article is based on the undisputed assertion that Proportionality is inherent in Compliance, in particular when this takes the form of a sanction, but the author compares this assertion with its practical implementation. The author notes that in all the compliance mechanisms, in particular in Competition Compliance, companies have difficulties in practice in satisfying with their obligations in Ex Ante because the standards are very heavy, expensive and difficult to understand, as they have difficulty. in Ex Post to obtain that the authorities do not make a disproportionate use of them, and to obtain that the courts effectively protect them from that. These practical difficulties are due above all to the diversity of the standards concerned, those who create them as well as those who interpret them having to do so without excess, about what it is very difficult to obtain control. In addition, the weight of the implementation of compliance standards is not correlated with the concrete and financial ability of diverses companies to do so and the design of standards does not always integrate this correlation. Faced with this, companies then tend to do more than is necessary, in order not to incur sanctions in the doubt, and moreover because the people in charge of the effectiveness of their compliance standards have in the mind not to engage their own responsibility, which encourages them to over-apply compliance obligations, when there should be a fair and strict relationship of necessity, that is to say this desired proportionality, this additional cost being a useless excess for all. Finally, a practical difficulty is due to the violence, in itself necessary, of the sanctions, in the face of which the companies seek in Ex Post to show the disproportionate nature, but do not have very sure means of proof. This is why it is often on the ground of rhetoric and of the conviction that enterprises are placed in practice, more than on that of the mathematical calculation of proportionality. -     📝 see the general presentation of the book, Compliance Monumental Goals, in which this article is published   -  

Articles in The Journal of Regulation & Compliance « JoRC »

RAPP, Lucien🕴️

📝Conformité, proportionnalité et normativité, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance

► Full Reference: L. Rapp, "Conformité, proportionnalité et normativité" ("Compliance, proportionality and normativity"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2022, pp. 177-198. - 📕read a general presentation of the book, Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, in which this article is published - ► Summary of the article (done by the Author): Proportionality is to the exercise of powers what subsidiarity is to the exercise of competences: an indicator as well as a limit. It determines the scope and allows for control at the same time. It sets the standard, before being a standard itself. This may explain why, in principle, it is part of the judge's office and his methods of assessment. But a study of its recent evolution shows that it is gradually moving from the ex-post to the ex-ante, which makes it possible to anticipate that it will soon become an effective tool of compliance policies and a useful normative reference. The article developments demonstrate this, by explaining how one slides from the principle of proportionality to proportionality control, from proportionality control to proportional reasoning, from proportional reasoning to compliance control, and finally, in a last desirable evolution, from compliance control to the necessary proportionality of control.  -

Articles in a legal collective publication

RAPP, Lucien👤

Compliance, Proportionality and Normativity, in Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📘Compliance Monumental Goals

► Full Reference: Rapp, L., Proportionality and Normativity, in Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.),Compliance Monumental Goals, series "Compliance & Regulation", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, to be published. - ► Article Summary:  done by the Author): Proportionality is to the exercise of powers what subsidiarity is to the exercise of competences: an indicator as well as a limit. It determines the scope and allows for control at the same time. It sets the standard, before being a standard itself. This may explain why, in principle, it is part of the judge's office and his methods of assessment. But a study of its recent evolution shows that it is gradually moving from the ex-post to the ex-ante, which makes it possible to anticipate that it will soon become an effective tool of compliance policies and a useful normative reference. The following developments demonstrate this, by explaining how one moves from the principle of proportionality to proportionality control, from proportionality control to proportional reasoning, from proportional reasoning to compliance control, and finally, in a last desirable evolution, from compliance control to the necessary proportionality of control. -     📝 see the general presentation of the book in which this article is published   -  

Articles in a legal collective publication

LINDEN, Alexandre🕴️

📝Motivation and publicity of the decisions of the Restricted formation of the French Data Protection Authority (Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés – CNIL) in a compliance perspective, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation

► Full Reference : A. Linden, "Motivation and publicity of the decisions of the Restricted formation of the French Data Protection Authority (Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertés – CNIL) in a compliance perspective", 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, Complinace Jurisdictionalisation, in which this article is published - ► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation and Compliance): In the event of a breach of the personal data protection rules, the restricted formation of the French personal data protection Commission (CNIL) pronounces fines, injunctions of "compliance" or calls to order. It can order the publication of these measures, which can be contested before the French High Administrative supreme court (Conseil d'État). It is essential that these decisions be justified, not only in order to respect this principle of law but also concretely to obtain the public concerned, being very heterogeneous, understand them, the educational role of the CNIL also being applicable. The principle of publicity is handled with nuance, the data controllers often requesting a closed door and, in fact, very few public attending the hearing. The publicity of decisions is in itself a sanction. The publication may moreover not be total or may only have a time, anonymization often allowing the balance between necessary pedagogy and preservation of interests, the CNIL taking great attention to the very modalities of publication, even if it cannot control the circulation and the media use which is then made of it. - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses -

Articles in The Journal of Regulation & Compliance « JoRC »

SCEMLA, Sophie🕴️ et PAILLOT, Diane🕴️

📝The difficulty for Compliance Enforcement Authorities to comprehend the Rights of the Defence in compliance matters, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation

► Full Reference: S. Scemla & D. Paillot, "The difficulty for Compliance Enforcement Authorities to comprehend the Rights of the Defence in compliance matters", 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 Authors): Since 2016, French companies subject to the provisions of the so-called “Sapin 2” Law must implement eight stringent anti-corruption measures, such as a risk mapping, a whistleblowing procedure or a third-party due diligence procedure. To ensure their compliance with these obligations, the Sapin 2 law created the Agence française anticorruption – AFA (French Anti-Corruption Agency), which had been assigned three missions: firstly, to help any person prevent and detect corruption; secondly, to control the quality and effectiveness of the anti-corruption programs deployed by the companies; and thirdly, to sanction any breaches, through its Sanctions Committee. As pointed out by the French Conseil d’État, the powers devolved to the administrations have multiplied and became stratified. While the Conseil d'État suggests to improve both the conduct and the effectiveness of administrative controls by harmonising their practices and simplifying their prerogatives, it is urgent to remedy the numerous procedural failures that undermine the rights of defence. In fact, the AFA exercises various powers when undertaking its controls. Some of these powers are not provided for by the Law, and most of them infringe fundamental rights and freedoms among which the adversarial principle and the freedom not to self-incriminate. For instance, the AFA does not necessarily draft minutes of the interviews it conducts, thus depriving the interviewee of the possibility to challenge the statements reported by the AFA to the Sanctions Committee. From a more structural point of view, the scope of the AFA's mission is extremely broad. The Law allows the AFA to request the communication of "any professional document or any useful information", without defining the notion of usefulness. Also, the AFA considers that the entity cannot benefit from the legal privilege that would cover their documents, and considers that an entity who voluntarily hands over a document, without expressing any reserves, waives its right to the benefit of its legal privilege. Apart from the severe consequences that could arise if another proceedings was to be initiated by a foreign authority, the concept of "voluntary handover" does not faithfully reflect the reality. Indeed, the controlled entities only cooperate under the threat of being prosecuted on the basis of an obstruction to the control, which compels them to communicate documents even when facing the risk of contributing to their own incrimination. These many procedural deficiencies encountered during AFA controls must therefore be reformed, as recommended by the Conseil d’État, so as to require the authorities to take into account the rights of the defence. - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses -

Articles in The Journal of Regulation & Compliance « JoRC »

MOREL-MAROGER, Juliette🕴️

📝The application of compliance standards by European Union judges, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation

► Full Reference: J. Morel-Maroger, "The application of compliance standards by European Union judges", 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 Author): Compliance rules are intended to pursue objectives of public interest – or monumental goals – and thereby in principle modify and guide the behaviour of economic operators. In order to achieve these objectives, the full spectrum of norms are used in compliance matters. What is and what should be the role of the judges of the European Union in the development of compliance rules ? As in domestic law, the legality of compliance standards developed by regulatory authorities has been challenged. It will first be necessary to analyse what control the judges of the European Union have over these rules. The question arises essentially as regards the rules of soft law, the challenge of which can be considered in two ways : by way of an action for annulment and by exception by way of a preliminary ruling. But beyond the control of the legality of compliance rules exercised by European judges, they also contribute to their application. The effectiveness of compliance rules depend above all on them being followed by those to whom they are addressed, and economic operators are undoubtedly the first actors of its success. But the judges of the European Union, competent to settle disputes concerning the application of European Union law between the Member States, the European institutions, and individual applicants, may be also be involved in ensuring the effectiveness of European compliance rules and in interpreting them. - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses -

Articles in The Journal of Regulation & Compliance « JoRC »

CAYROL, Nicolas🕴️

📝Procedural Principles in Compliance Law, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation

► 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 -