Court of Cassation

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "GPA : "L’interdiction de la GPA posée par le Code civil n’existe plus" ("The French Civil Code ban on surrogacy no longer exists"), interview with Olivia Dufour, Actu-Juridique, 26 November 2024 - 💬read the interview (in French) - ► Presentation of the interview by the journal: "Un simple arrêt de section rendu par la première civile de la Cour de cassation le 14 novembre 2024 peut-il donner plein effet à une "pure convention de GPA" ? Telle est la question que l’on peut se poser à la suite de cette décision. Éléments de réponse avec le professeur Marie-Anne Frison-Roche. ". - 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📕GPA : dire Oui ou dire Non, 2018 - ► Questions posées, réponses apportées :  Actu-Juridique. Question : Un arrêt de section de la première chambre civile de la Cour de cassation rendu le 14 novembre dernier en matière de gestation pour autrui (GPA) a suscité l’émotion. Est-il exact de dire qu’en pratique, suite à cette décision, la prohibition en France de la GPA n’existe plus ?   Marie-Anne Frison-Roche. Réponse. :    A.J. Q. : Quels étaient les faits de l’espèce et en quoi diffèrent-ils des autres affaires ? MaFR. R. : O A.J. Q. : L’Europe avait-elle déjà pris position sur la GPA et si oui, par quels textes et dans quel sens ? MaFR. R. : En Europe, c'est la jurisprudence de la CEDH qui en 2014 (arrêts Mennesson) est venu briser la jurisprudence française pour imposer que la filiation de l'enfant né d'une GPA réalisée à l'étranger dans un pays où la GPA est licite puisse être établie à l'égard du père dont les gamètes avaient été utilisées. Il ne restait plus alors qu'à procéder à l'adoption par le conjoint de celui-ci. La législation interne ne fût pas pour autant modifiée mais le fonctionnement de l'état-civil permet de rendre inefficace la prohibition. Mais c'était à la fois dire Non et Oui… L'enjeu fût donc de modifier les textes, soit pour exclure la GPA plus fortement, soit pour l'admettre plus ouvertement.   A.J. Q. : En quoi la technique juridique utilisée pour faire reconnaître cette GPA en France était-elle différente de ce que l’on connait usuellement ? MaFR. R. : C   A.J. Q. : Quelle est la portée de cet arrêt ? MaFR. R. : I   A.J. Q. : Qu’en est-il du rapport avec l’adoption ? MaFR. R. : S   A.J. Q. : Le rapporteur n’a-t-il pas évoqué une possibilité de déguiser une adoption illicite à l’étranger sous une GPA ? MaFR. R. : S - 🌐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 Newsletter Surplomb, par MAFR

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, coordination of the conference Dans l’espace de justice, les pratiques juridictionnelles au service du futur (In the Space of Justice, Jurisdictional Practices at the Service of the Future), in Cour de cassation, cycle of conferences "Penser les pratiques juridictionnelles au service d’un espace de justice" ("Thinking jurisdictional practices in the service of a Space of Justice"), 21 November 2023, 4pm.-6.30pm. - ► General presentation of the conference: The conception of the conference takes account of the fact that the event comes almost last in the cycle. Previous themes have been ‘jurisdictional practices’ insofar as they are ‘at the service of a European area of justice’ (February 2023), ‘enlightened’ (March 2023), ‘attractive’ (June 2023), ‘interactive’ (September 2023) and ‘peacemaking’ (December 2023). The conference's problematic stems from an observation: today, judges are facing claims that relate directly to the future. Of course, in their traditional office judges deal with the future of disputed situations, but today it is the future of systems in their entirety that is sometimes submitted to them through a dispute or a request, and a solution is sought. The possible presence of future generations is just one sign of this. The space of justice may seem unsuitable for such gigantic trials, both in terms of their subject matter and their impact. No doubt a distinction must be made between judges, and some judges may seem more familiar than others with the systemic issues that the future brings with it. Perhaps the judge's prudence should lead him not to use his power over the future, for example in the handling of sanctions, forgetting that the future by its very nature contains an element of the unknown, a fundamental prudence which the principle of the legality of offences and penalties expresses. But the future is not a blank page either and the judge, without inventing it, can check the coherence of those who write the law, if he is a constitutional judge, those who write contracts and commitments, if he is a civil or commercial judge. In order to fulfil their office, which the stakeholders are demanding, judges need to think about and deal with this new systemic object before them: the future. To understand it, judges draw on available jurisdictional practices, adjust others, and link them together using new methods. - 🧮read the programme of the cycle of conférences in 2023 (in French) -

► 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'État et de la Cour de cassation – Colloque du 2 juin 2023, La Documentation française, "Droits et Débats" Serie, 2024, pp. 173-182 - 🎥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) - 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law  - ► Full Reference:  M.-A. Frison-Roche et A. Seban, "Compliance : les cours suprêmes s’emparent de la question de ses enjeux juridictionnels" ("Compliance : the Supreme Courts take up the issue of its jurisdictional implications"), interview with Olivia Dufour, Actu-Juridique, 5 July 2023. - 💬read the interview (in French) - ► Presentation of the interview by the journal (in French): "Le 2 juin dernier s’est tenu au Conseil d’État un colloque fondateur sur le rôle du juge dans la compliance. Le professeur Marie-Anne Frison-Roche et le conseiller d’État Alain Seban, qui ont tout deux contribué aux débats, ont accepté de commenter les principaux enseignements des travaux de cette journée." - ► Questions asked (in French):  Le colloque « De la régulation à la compliance, quel rôle pour les juges » qui s’est tenu au Conseil d’État le 2 juin dernier a rassemblé juges civils et administratifs. En quoi le juge administratif est-il concerné par la compliance qui semble plutôt une affaire d’entreprises et donc de justice civile et commerciale ?  ​Vincent Vigneau, président de la chambre commerciale de la Cour de cassation rappelle que la compliance a plutôt vocation à éviter le juge en se situant ex ante, pourtant on découvre que le juge lui-même accepte de plus en plus de se prononcer en ex ante… qu’en est-il ?  Quel peut donc être le rôle du juge dans la compliance ? Peut-il contribuer à faire émerger un droit de la compliance et à l’harmoniser ?  ​ ​François Ancel semble considérer que le rôle juge va devoir adapter son office à la compliance, il évoque trois concepts : téléologique, soutenabilité et efficacité… Le juge dispose-t-il en l’état de tous les outils nécessaires ? Si tel n’est pas le cas, que faut-il créer ? En quoi le dialogue des juges, civil/administratif, national/européen, national/international, est-il important ? Que veut dire F. Ancel quand il déclare que le juge doit évoluer du constat à la trajectoire ? Existe-t-il des domaines où la compliance entre en conflit avec des principes processuels, par exemple le principe de légalité des peines ? En quoi la notion de « buts monumentaux », que vous avez créée en 2016, a-t-elle trouvé sa place dans le droit ? -

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Le rôle du Juge dans le déploiement du Droit de la Régulation en Droit de la Compliance (The role of the Judge in the deployment of Regulatory Law in Compliance Law), in Conseil d'État (French Administrative Supreme Court) and Cour de cassation (French Judiciaire Supreme Court of cassation), De la Régulation à la Compliance : quel rôle pour le Juge ? ("From Regulatory to Compliance : what role for the judge?"), speech constituting the "closing session" of the bi-annual joint symposium of the two High Courts, held at the Conseil d'État, Salle d'Assemblée générale, 2 June 2023. The event was held in French. - 🧮See the full programme of this event (in French) - 🎥watch the interview given about the conclusion, done after the speech (in French) - 🧮read the general programme of the manifestation (in French) - 📚read the bibliographical dossier du participant. (participant's file made in French) - 🎥watch the general introductory speechs of Didier-Roland Tabuteau, Vice-Président du Conseil d'État, de Christophe Soulard, Premier Président de la Cour de cassation, and of François Molins, Procureur général près la Cour de cassation ;  and the interventions in the first session devoted to the path from the Regulatory to the Compliance with Marie-Anne Barbat-Layani, présidente de l'AMF, Jean-Yves Ollier, conseiller d'Etat, Daniel Calleja-Crespo, directeur général du service juridique de la Commission européenne andChristine Guegen, , première avocate générale de la chambre commerciale de la Cour de cassation - 🎥watch the speechs in the second session devoted to the office of the judge with  Vincent Vigneau, président de la chambre commerciale de la Cour de cassation, François Ancel, conseiller à la première chambre civile de la Cour de cassatin, Astrid Mignon-Colombet, avocate à la Cour, Lucien Rapp, professeur à Toulouse-Capitol and Alain Seban, conseiller d'Etat ; the speechs of the third session dedicated to the Compliance new frontiers, with Christophe Chantepy, président de la section du contentieux du Conseil d'État, Roch-Olivier Maistre, président de l'Arcom, Paul Nihoul, juge au Tribunal de l'Union européenne, Jean-François Bohnert, procureur de la République financier, Joëlle Tolédano, professeure émérite à Dauphine ; the final session with Marie-Anne Frison-Roche - 🎥watch this final speech by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, which formed the closing session of the event - 🚧read the bilingual Working Paper used as basis for the article to be published later - 💬read the interview given by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche and Alain Seban after the colloquia and entitled "Compliance : les cours suprêmes s’emparent de la question de ses enjeux juridictionnels" ("Compliance : the Supreme Courts take up the issue of its jurisdictional implications") - ► English presentation of this general conclusion: Having a definition of Compliance Law in mind, a definition around which there still seems to be so much dispute, is not required to understand that this Law is what will enable us to enter and deal with a new world and if this subject is so fascinating to young people who want to become lawyers, prosecutors, regulators or judges, even though they are not taught this subject, it is because they have understood that with Compliance Law they will be able to actively participate in this new world and build it. This is the way we want it to take it, with force and courage in a sort of collective adventure. In this way, the Judges have a monumental role to play, which is at the very heart of Compliance Law. They will necessarily be so because demands and claims will converge on them from all sides, from Internet users, consumers, investors, associations and companies, and the Judge will have to respond. This has already started and is only just beginning. Judges must be prepared. Four expectations are emerging as to what their role should be. Firstly, judges must persist in their role as guardians of the Rule of Law, in a Compliance Law impregnated with technologies (algorithms) that could be described as insensitive. Secondly, beyond this vital role as guardian of the Rule of Law, the Judge has a new role in the extraordinary deployment of Compliance Law, which is measured in terms of the novelty of the normative control it exercises, the commitments it supports, the remedies it finds and the sustainability it reinforces. Thirdly, in the natural space of justice, the judge responds to parties who make claims of compliance, both as plaintiff and defendant, because the causes of compliance are systemic causes that deserve a new jurisdictional treatment. Fourthly, given the novelty and scope of this innovative approach, all judges must converge in terms of content, qualifications, and methods if they are both to continue their traditional role as guardians of the Rule of Law and to be able to endure their new role, a dialogue in which they have so much to contribute to each other. - 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

► Full Reference: O. Douvreleur, "Compliance et juge du droit" ("Compliance and Judge ruling only on points of Law"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, pp. 465-471.  - 📕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): 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. -

► 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   -      

Full reference: Cour de Cassation, Chambre criminelle, 25th of November 2020 (18-86.955), Decision n°2333, société Iron mountain France SAS Read the decision (in French) Read the press release from the Cour de Cassation (in French) ​Read the explication note from the Cour de Cassation (in French) Read Julie Gallois' comment   Summary of the decision In this decision constituting a case law reversal, the Chambre criminelle of the Cour de Cassation decides that the firm which absorbs the one to which are imputable facts which can receive a penal qualification leading to penalties of fines has the aptitude to answer penally. The decision precises that this reversal is applicable only to future cases, to respect the principle of predicability, except if this merging was operated only to escape from criminal responsibility of moral persons.  This case is an example of the use of Criminal Liability Law as an incentive.     

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Responding to an email with "serious anomalies"​,transferring personal data, blocks reimbursement by the bank: French Cour de cassation, July 1st 2020, Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation, 10th of September 2020 Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation   Summary of the news "Phishing" is a kind of cyber criminality aiming to obtain, by sending fraudulent emails which look like to those sent by legitimate organisms, recipient's personal information in order to impersonate or steal him or her. As it is difficult to find the authors of "phishing" and to prove their intentionality in order to punish them directly, on mean to fight against "phishing" could be to entitle banks to secure their information network and, to accompany this obligation with a strong incentive, to convict them to reimburse the victims in case of robbery of their personal data.   In 2015, a client victime of this kind of fraud asked to his bank, the Crédit Mutuel, to reimburse him the amount stole, what the bank refused to do on the grounds that the client committed a fault, transferring its confidential information without checking the email, however grossly counterfeit. The Court of first instance gave reason to the client because although he committed this fault, he was in good faith. This judgment was broken by the Chambre commerciale de la Cour de cassation (French Judicial Supreme Court) by a decision of 1st of July 2020 which states that this serious negligence, exclusive of any consideration of good faith, justifies the absence of reimbursement by the bank. -   From this particular case, we can draw three lessons:  The Cour de Cassation states that good faith is not a salient criterion and that, as the bank must react when a banking account is objectively abnormal, the client must react face to an obviously abnormal email.  The Cour de Cassation describes the repartition of proof burden. Proof obligations are alternatively distributed between the bank and its client. First, the bank must secure its information network but, secondly, the client must take every reasonable measure to preserve its safety. It results from this that, if the email seems normal, phishing damages must be supported by the bank, and more generally of by the firm, while if the email is obviously abnormal, they must be supported by the client, but the burden to prove the abnormality of the email must be supported by the firm and not by the client.  Such a proof system shows that Compliance Law includes a pedagogic mission by educating each client in order to he or she would be able to distinguish among his or her emails, those which are normal and those which are obviously suspect. This pedagogic dimension, with the legal consequences associated to it, will not stop to spread.    -

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Being obliged by Law to unlock telephone is not equivalent to self-incrimination: Cour de cassation, Criminal Chamber, Dec. 19, 2019, Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation, 21st of August 2020 Read by freely subscribing the other news of the Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation   Summary of the news The Cour de Cassation (French Supreme Judicial Court) made a decision on 19th of December 2019 about a case concerning a refusal to communicate his mobile phone's unlock code to the police while the police found him with a significant quantity of narcotic and a lot of cash and that there was a certain probability that this mobile phone get proofs of culpability of its owner. The individual was indicted not for narcotic trafficking but for not having communicate its unlock code which constitute an offense to article 434-15-2 of code pénal, from the loi du 3 juin 2018 renforçant la lutte contre la criminalité organisée, et le terrorisme et leur financement (law reinforcing organized crime, terrorisme and their financing). The accused invokes before the court its right to not incriminate oneself. Indeed, the configuration face to policemen was such that if he refused to communicate its unlock code, he will be punished because of this obligation to communicate his code and that if he accepted, he will also be sanctioned because of the proofs contained into the mobile phone. Such a configuration therefore offered him no alternative to confessing, which is contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights and to European and national jurisprudence. Face to such a case, the Cour de Cassation chose to segment the information and proposed the following solution: if the researched information cannot be obtained regardless of the suspect willingness, it is not possible to constraint this person to communicate this information without violating its procedural rights, but if the information can be obtained regardless of the suspect willingness then the individual is obliged to communicate his code. In the current case, as it was possible for policemen to obtain information contained in the phone by technical means, longer but existent, then the refuse of communication of the unlock code by the suspect constitute an obstruction that should be sanctioned.  Such a decision is an exemple of the conciliation by the judge of two fundamental but contradictory "monumental goals" of Compliance Law: transparency of information towards public authorities and very sensible personal data protection.  ​To go further, read Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's working paper: Rethinking the world from the notion of data    

Complete reference :  Aranda Vasquez, A., Affaire Generali : la Cour de cassation précise les caractéristiques de l'obligation, in Petites affiches, février 2018, n° 39, pp. 12-15.     "The Generali case is experiencing a new episode. The Court of Cassation has clarified the essential characteristics of the obligation. It is reverting to the position of the judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal of June 21, 2016 (n ° 15 / 00317), by deciding that the reimbursement of the nominal amount is not an essential characteristic of the obligation. The highest court of the judiciary thus sheds light on the matter. "   Sciences-Po students can consult the article via the Drive, "MAFR- Regulation & Compliance" folder