🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Duty of vigilance: the way forward, Working Paper, 2023.

____

🎤 This working paper has been drawn up to serve as a basis for the conclusions of the colloquium Le devoir de vigilance: l'âge de la maturité? ("The duty of vigilance: the age of maturity?") organised by the University of Montpellier on 25 May 2023.

_____

📝 Updated and developed, it serves as the basis for the article that concludes the book Le devoir de vigilance des entreprises : l'âge de la maturité? ("The duty of vigilance: the age of maturity?"), Editions Bruylant, 2024.

____

► Working Paper summary: In 2017 in France the so-called Vigilance law expressed great ambition. So did the draft directive. But in 2024 the European institutions moderated this ambition by refusing to increase either the type of companies subject and the constraints to which the duty of vigilance is associated. The directive has essentially halted what was for some the "march of progress". Does the ambition no longer exist? Does the future lie in an extension of the philosophy of the duty of vigilance, i.e. companies that should always be more concerned about others? This would undoubtedly be reaching the "age of maturity", where others see the age of madness, because it would be a contradiction in terms to ask a company to be concerned about anything other than its own development.

It is therefore appropriate to consider this very hypothesis of an "age of maturity" as being an ambition maintained despite a European directive which, in its adopted version, is weakened and while the oppositions are intact (I). First of all, it must be admitted that the notion of "maturity" most often conceals a value judgment when applied to a legal concept (I.A.) and that this is blatantly obvious with regard to the duty of vigilance, which is considered by some and by nature by some as a good and by others as an evil (I.B).

In order not to remain in what appears to be trench warfare, we must not get too bogged down in the reference French legislation of 2017 and what appears to be a European stutter in 2024, arguing so loudly that we can hear them reasoning in print, by paying attention to less visible and now more promising avenues of progress (II). In fact, the duty of vigilance can progress simply by the passage of time (II.A), by a better definition of the vocabulary (II.B), by the consolidation of the principles of Responsibility and Dialogue (II.C), by the uniqueness of the jurisdictional route (II.D).

This last perspective of the progress that will be made possible in France by the uniqueness of the judicial route leads to a final avenue of progress. By their very nature, laws are jolts, all the more violent for being disputed. At the moment, if we want to make progress, these two other sources - the contract and the judge - must be favoured (III). The European directive is rightly concerned with access to the courts and takes a measured view of the effectiveness of contracts as a means of making the duty of vigilance effective, with the courts having to ensure that the contract does not destroy the spirit of the system. This is what the law already organises about the relationship between the contract, the judge and the duty of compliance (III.A). What is new in Europe in 2024 is the introduction of a Supervisor (III.B). Here again, vigilance is the "cutting edge" of Compliance Law, as it is an extension of Regulatory Law. 

The result is that, through interpretation and the handling of principles, and to formulate a more general conclusion, it is the judge who holds and will hold the balance of the duty of vigilance.

____

🔓read the Working Paper below⤵️

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Les voies d'innovations juridiques face aux nouveaux "défis climatiques" ("Innovative legal solutions to the new "climate challenges""), in C. Arnaud, O. de Bandt et B. Deffains (dir.), Nouveaux défis - Regards croisés : Droit, Économie et Finance. Quel Droit face au Changement Climatique ? (("New challenges - Crossed perspectives : Law, Economics and Finance. What Law in the Face of Climate Change?"), Banque de France (French Central Bank) and CRED/Paris Panthéon-Assas University, Paris, Centre de Conférence de la Banque de France, April 2, 2024

____

🧮See the full programme of this event

____

🔲see the slides, basis of this conference (in French)

____

► Summary of this conference: In response to the question of how the Law can produce 'innovations' to meet the 'climate challenges', the process is based on the three traditional sources of Law, which are, firstly, laws and regulations, secondly, the commitments of individuals, mainly contracts, and thirdly, court rulings.

At first sight, the Law in its traditional conception and practice is weak in the face of climate change. This weakness is inherent in the nature of climate change, which is at once future, global and systemic, in the face of these three sources of Law, which do not address all three dimensions at once. The scale of the legal innovation required to ensure that one or more articulated sources can grasp the future, the global and the systemic is therefore clear. And yet this is what is happening.

As far as laws and regulations are concerned, they do not seem very appropriate because they are, by their very nature, a territorial limit, and international treaties are very difficult to negotiate. The interweaving of European regulations, for example the CSRD and the CS3D, which mirror each other, may be more effective. As far as 'commitments' are concerned, a concept which in Law is not very precise outside of contracts and liability cases📎!footnote-3568, contracts are above all a means for companies to fulfill their legal obligations, and a contract always implies a judge. At first sight, however, the judge is the least well placed to respond to 'climate challenges', particularly in France where he is said or wished to be powerless, where he rules on the past and where, especially the civil judge, he settles a one-off dispute between two singular parties.

But a major change has occurred with the emergence of a new branch of law: the Compliance Law, a teleological branch of Law whose legal normativity is lodged in the Monumental Goals📎!footnote-3572 that it pursues, namely the preservation of systems, for example the climate system. In France, the so-called "Sapin 2" law in 2016, followed by the so-called "Vigilance" law in 2017, illustrate this. And the Judge is at the centre of it all.

In this global, systemic, extraterritorial perspective, the object of which is the future - Compliance Law is, moreover, rejected by many legal experts - the legislative innovation is major. Indeed, the law of 23 March 2017, known as "Vigilance" designated large companies, because they are "powerful", because they are "in a position to act" to "detect and prevent" breaches of the environment and human rights. The 2017 law copied the "compliance tools"📎!footnote-3573 put in place by the Sapin 2 anti-corruption law: risk mapping, plans, alerts, audits, internal investigations, and so on. 

Only large companies are subject to the Compliance Law, notably the Vigilance Law, since they are the only ones in a position to act, in this case "parent companies or principals", and borders are no longer limits since the obligation, creating personal liability for the company📎!footnote-3574, extends throughout the "value chain". The notion and fact of "systemic dispute" is emerging before the courts. In France, the Paris Court of First Instance has exclusive jurisdiction. European legislation is proving more difficult to draw up, because although it is compulsory to provide information on these "extra-financial" subjects (CSRD), the directive on the duty of vigilance, which has just been adopted, does not go any further than the French law of 2017.

On the second point, that of commitments, we are only at the beginning. Judges do not transform ethical statements into "unilateral legal commitments", and vigilance does not transform company law into co-management. But contracts do form a global network through which companies adjust their various legal obligations. This is why arbitrators, the only "global judges", will soon be involved in this systemic litigation📎!footnote-3575, and more general case law is to come on "compliance contracts and clauses"📎!footnote-3576.

But the most innovative aspect undoubtedly comes from the courts. Perhaps and notably in France because it is from where we least expect it, the civil courts, that the imagination comes, but also the guarding of the great principles of the Rule of Law, because for the moment the case law is reasonable. This innovation has not come about proprio motu: the judges are not taking action, it is the NGOs that are conducting a kind of litigation policy, systematically giving formal notice to the major energy companies, but also to the major banks and insurers on climate issues, alleging non-compliance with their vigilance plans. The interim relief judge at the Paris Court of First Instance must then provide answers in systemic disputes, of which the so-called "Total Uganda"📎!footnote-3577 case is an example.

The courts are demonstrating a great deal of innovation. The Court of First Instance's interim relief judge has appointed amici curiae📎!footnote-3569, the Paris Court of Appeal has set up a specialised chamber📎!footnote-3570, and training conferences have been set up on this "Emerging Systemic Litigation"📎!footnote-3571.

In conclusion, Law is in the process of being rebuilt through a new branch of Law, Compliance Law, whose the very purpose, as an extension of and going beyond Regulatory Law📎!footnote-3578, is to preserve systems, in particular the climate system, in a profoundly renewed role for judges📎!footnote-3580.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: F. Ancel &  M.-A. Frison-Roche, Droit de la compliance (Compliance Law), École nationale de la magistrature - ENM (French National School for the Judiciary), in collaboration with the École de Formation professionnelle des Barreaux du ressort de la cour d'appel de Paris - EFB (Paris Bar School), Paris, February 1 and 2, 2024

This teaching is given in French.

____

🌐consult on LinkedIn a general présentation of this event, which links to a presentation and a report of each speech

____

► Presentation of the Teaching: The aim of this two-day conference is to enable judges and lawyers to grasp the issues, objectives and methods that define Compliance Law as it is practised in companies.

The speakers will illustrate the growing trend towards litigation, which is difficult to reconcile with the supranational dimension, or even indifference to territories, for example when disputes concern systemic climate or digital issues: the result is a renewal of the role of the judge and the role of lawyers.

This must be set against the renewal of the role and operation of companies themselves.

This is analysed from the perspective of Civil Law, in particular Contract Law and Liability Law. Company Law and Criminal Law are also addressed, as well as the way in which the legal system now integrates governance, regulation, climate and digital issues and the smooth operation of financial markets through Compliance techniques.

____

► Organisation of the Teaching: This conference is divided into two parts.

The first day is designed as a presentation of the major themes through which Compliance Law crosses the branches of traditional Law. The speakers will be professors of Law who will successively summarise the branches of Law and put into perspective the way in which Compliance imperatives give rise to new situations, new difficulties and new solutions.

This enables the second day to focus on practical and topical issues and to debate controversial questions between people of different sensibilities. The participants tend to be judges, members of regulatory authorities, lawyers, members of associations and so on.

____

► Enrolment procedure: The course is open to all judicial and consular magistrates, as well as lawyers.

Registrations can be made directly with the ENM or with the EFB.

____

► Speakers :  

🎤François Ancel, Judge at the Première Chambre civile de la Cour de cassation (First Civil Chamber of the French Court of cassation) 

🎤Thomas Baudesson, Attorney at the Paris Bar, Partner at Clifford Chance

🎤Guillaume Beaussonie, Full Professor at Toulouse 1 Capitole University

🎤Jacques Boulard, Premier Président de la Cour d’appel de Paris (First President of the Paris Court of Appeal)

🎤Marie Caffin-Moi, Full Professor at Paris Panthéon-Assas University

🎤Malik Chapuis, Judge at the Tribunal judiciaire de Paris (Paris First Instance Civil Court)

🎤Lucie Chatelain, Advocacy and Litigation Manager - Civil Liability of Parent Companies, Sherpa

🎤Jean-Benoît Devauges, Directeur Juridique, Ethique et Gouvernance des entreprises (Legal, Ethics and enterprises governance Director), MEDEF

🎤Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Professor of Regulatory and Compliance Law, Director of the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC)

🎤Arnaud Gossement, Attorney at the Paris Bar, Partner at Gossement Avocats

🎤Thibault Goujon-Bethan, Full Professor at Jean Moulin Lyon 3 University

🎤Christophe Ingrain, Attorney at the Paris Bar, Partner at Darrois Villey Maillot Brochier

🎤Isabelle Jegouzo, Director of the Agence française anticorruption - AFA (French Anti-Corruption Agency) 

🎤Anne-Valérie Le Fur, Full Professor at Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines University

🎤Charlotte Michon, Attorney at the Paris Bar, partner at Charlotte Michon Avocat

🎤Jean-Baptiste Racine, Full Professor at Paris Panthéon-Assas University

🎤 Jean-Christophe Roda, Full Professor at Jean-Moulin Lyon 3 University

🎤Jérôme Simon, 1er Vice-Procureur Financier (First Financial Vice-Prosecutor)

____

🧮read below the programme put together and organised by François Ancel and Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, as well as the reports of each presentation⤵️

♾️follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Participation à la Table ronde "Normes de Responsabilité Sociale des Entreprises (RSE & Devoir de Vigilance)" (Participation in the Round Table "Corporate Social Responsibility Standards (CSR & Duty of Vigilance)"), in Fribourg University, Journée du Droit, Fribourg University, Pérolles site, room C230, October 2, 2023.

____

🧮see the full programme of this event

🎥​watch the video of this event (in French)

____

🌐read the report written in French with photos, tags and links on LinkedIn and also with links to each the speech

____

► General presentation of the event : This conference, build around 4 presentations and a debate between the speakers and then with the audience, aimed at explaining and understanding this fundamental movement and the new texts that express it in Switzerland, even if it is French law, such as the so-called 'Vigilance' law of 2017 and the draft European CS3D directive, because on the one hand it is a movement that begins with legal technique and on the other hand the texts in question are extraterritorial in scope, if only because of the notion of 'value chain'. In the first part of this round table, and to set the scene, I will outline the origin and content of the French 'Vigilance' law, the way in which the draft directive draws heavily on it, its relationship with Compliance Law, of which it constitutes the 'advanced point', and the decisive role it gives to the courts, in the general movement of the jurisdictionalisation of compliance. The purpose of this is to allow the discussion to get underway.

🕴️Idris Abdelkhalek, PhD candidate and lawyer, introduced the speakers and led the debate between them and the audience. He took questions from the audience on the intensity of the obligation weighing on companies, in particular between civil liability and criminal liability, between the obligation of means and the obligation of result, and on the way in which the duty of vigilance is applied to specific sectors such as defence.

____

► Presentation of my speech : the subject of which was Presentation of French Vigilance law, European perspective and European Compliance System. My presentation was divided into four points. Firstly, I outlined the state of Law in France, in the novelty represented by the 2017 law known as the "Vigilance" law, whose principles are simple and strong, principles that are situated in the aims pursued, and the way in which this law inspires what is currently being negotiated: the CS3D Directive.

Secondly, I stressed the need for companies to master these often technically complicated corpus, especially if we take into account the link between Vigilance and the CSRD directive on sustainability reporting and extra-financial information. 

Thirdly, I have shown that an overall understanding can nevertheless be achieved, and that the technical nature of the 'tools' is better mastered if we place the duty of vigilance within Compliance Law, of which it constitutes the 'advanced point'. All of this anchors its legal normativity in the 'Monumental Goals' it serves, which in Europe are humanistic, since the aim is to protect, now but above all in the future because it is a branch of ex ante Law, the human beings involved in the systems (banking, finance, energy, digital, climate, etc.).

Fourthly, I emphasised that this understanding enables everyone to play their part: political and public authorities, businesses and stakeholders. Even more, and at the heart of the matter, the judge plays an essential role, even in countries with so-called 'continental' Law. I have used current cases as examples. This is just the beginning, and judges need to train, specialise and work in dialogue to achieve this.

____

► Presentation of the other speakers contributions :

🕴️Marion Paradas, Ambassador of France to Switzerland and Liechtenstein, opened the conference and gave a general presentation of the theme. Ambassador Marion Paradas presented the international challenge represented by Law, illustrated here by the duty of vigilance. She emphasised that this is a major issue, both now and in the future, for Swiss companies and French companies based in Switzerland, particularly as this duty extends throughout the "value chain" and in view of the CS3D directive, which will also have consequences for both.

🕴️Isabelle Chabloz Waidacher, Professor at the Faculty of Law in Fribourg and holder of the Chair of Economic Law at the University of Fribourg, gave a Presentation of Swiss Law. In particular, she emphasised the state of Swiss Law, which could have gone further than the 2017 French law known as the "Vigilance" law if the popular initiative reference had led to the adoption of a law, and which currently focuses more on information and transparency obligations, with CSR taking over from there. But she stresses that the reality of value chains will force Swiss companies to take into account the requirements of the European directive currently being adopted.

🕴️Renaud Roussel, Managing Director of Colas Switzerland, presented an entrepreneurial view of the subject. He began by outlining the concrete steps taken by his industrial group in Switzerland and around the world to implement its commitments to protect the environment, for example by ensuring the proper use of materials used in road construction. He also stressed the importance of human rights, particularly in labour relations, in the context of CSR and vigilance. He went on to point out that it was not always easy for a large company to meet its own requirements, or the requirements imposed on it by the law, because in the construction and public works sector in particular it is often small companies that are competing, competitors who do not bear the costs of such obligations.

________

♾️follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Conclusion", in Club des avocats environnementalistes, L’eau : entre protection de la ressource et conflits d’usage, Maison des Avocats, Auditorium, September 28, 2023.

____

🧮see the full programme of this event

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "L'esprit des Lois en matière de vigilance" ("Spirit of Law in Vigilance (Due Diligences) matters"), in Haut Conseil du Commissariat aux Comptes (H3C), Réalités et défis de la CSRD - Perspectives du devoir de vigilance, Paris, 14 June 2023.

____

🎥watch the video of a part of the speech (in French)

____

🧱read the description of the speeches of other speakers of this panel (in French)

____ 

The speech took place during the third-round table devoted to the Perspectives du devoir de vigilance (Perspectives of the duty of vigilance), the first round table having been devoted to the lessons that the DPEF can provide for the CSRD, and the second to the transposition work of the CSRD.

🧮See the full programme of this annual event (in French)

____

► English summary of the speech: In consideration of and in addition to what has been said, explained and even affirmed by other speakers, I have emphasised that 'vigilance" laws is not a 'regulation' like any other, but the leading edge of a very vast movement, Compliance Law, in which the 2017 French law is the driving force. For its application, the Judge, who is at the centre because of the will of the Legislator, is already taking into consideration the CS3D, the twin text of the CSRD.

The texts must not be seen in isolation. If we isolate them from each other, they become almost incomprehensible, their meaning appearing uncertain, even threatening: we need to understand the spirit of these texts, which are indeed new, because they aim to provide answers to the new world we have entered. We must all rejoice in this political ambition, which is taking a legal form, and work to make it efficient: Legislators, companies, auditors, Regulators and Judges.

If we do not stop at the letter, which would be to reduce Compliance to conformity, whereas Compliance Law, particularly Vigilance, is the extension of Regulation, finds its meaning in the Goals, we see that the French law of 2017, known as the "Vigilance law", which copies all the techniques of the French law known as "Sapin 2", gives goals simple to understand to the companies subject to the Legislator's will: detect and prevent environmental and human rights abuses in the value chains.

The logic is therefore Ex-Ante.

This Ex-Ante logic is retained by the CS3D directive.

The Judge is central to it. But the responsibility which the NGOs will ask him to trigger is itself an "Ex Ante responsibility", the Compliance trials being like "accountability" trials, to ensure that companies act in accordance with the Goals set by the Legislator.

This is transforming the role of the Judge, who must find effective solutions for the future. The discussion and the adversarial principle will become more important. Mediation will be encouraged. Stakeholders and the company will have to work together, and this method, which was intended by the Legislator for drawing up the vigilance plan, will be continued in the supporting legal proceedings.

This will also transform the company, and the role played by those who accredit the information on the company's actions and long-term strategies: auditors therefore have a central role to play.

________