Thesaurus : Doctrine
Teachings : Banking and Financial Regulatory Law, 2016
Mais c'est d'une façon plus systématique encore qu'il faut sans cesse appliquer, par réflexe, une définition, une qualification. Par exemple : qu'est-ce qu'une banque ? qu'est-ce qu'une entreprise ? qu'est-ce que l'intérêt social ? qu'est-ce qu'un conseil ? qu'est-ce qu'une sanction ? etc.
En prenant tous ces exemples, l'on mesure qu'en matière de régulation bancaire et financière, le droit - comme partout ailleurs - ne saurait se réduire à une réglementation : c'est un art pratique dans lequel l'imagination est libre cours.
Accéder au plan de la leçon sur La primauté des définitions et des qualifications dans le droit de la régulation bancaire et financière.
Lire l'explicitation du thème de la leçon sur La primauté des définitions et des qualifications dans le droit de la régulation bancaire et financière.
Accéder aux slides de la leçon La primauté des définitions dans le droit de la régulation bancaire et financière
Consulter le Glossaire du Droit de la Régulation.
Consulter ci-dessous la bibliographie sommaire et approfondie.
Compliance and Regulation Law bilingual Dictionnary
The goal for which a mechanism, a solution an institution or a rule is adopted, instituted or elaborated, is in principle external to them. Knowledge of this goal is a tool to better understand them and is only that.
On the contrary, in Regulation Law, the goal is the heart itself. By definition, Regulation Law is a set of instruments that articulate to take their meaning in relation to a goal. Moreover, these instruments are legitimate to represent a constraint only because they realize a goal which is itself legitimate. The interpretation of Regulation Law is based on the aims pursued: the reasoning is teleological.
This teleological nature explains that efficiency is no longer merely a concern - as for ordinary legal mechanisms, but rather a principle of Regulation Law. It explains the welcome, especially through the European Union Law of the theory of the useful effect. This link between rules, which are only means, and aims, refers to the principle of proportionality, which requires that constraints and exceptions be applied only when they are necessary, proportionality being the form off the classic principle of necessity.
Because the aim is the center, it must be expressed by the author of the Regulation standards, and this is all the more so if they are of a political nature, being not limited to mitigating technical failures of markets. This goal can be varied: the management of systemic risks, but also the consideration of the fundamental rights of people, the preservation of the environment, public health, civilization, education, etc. The silence of the legislature, which limits itself to the making of rules whereas these are merely instruments, without explicating the goal whereas the latter is a political decision, is a fault in the legislative art.
Moreover, in order that the person who applies the Regulation norm, in particular the Regulator and the Judge, has no excessive margin for interpretation and does not substitute for political power, the author of the Regulation norm needs to aim specifically for one goal : in this way, the one who applies the norm will be constrained. Or, if the author targets several purposes, then he must articulate them in relation to each other, by hierarchizing them for example. If he fails to do so, the institution which applies the regulatory standards will itself have to choose the purpose and exercise a power which he does not possess.
This express designation of purpose has been made for the European Banking Union, this Regulation and Supervision construction, whose primary aim is to prevent systemic risks and resolve crises. Similarly, the purpose of the Regulation of essentiel infrastructures is to provide third parties access to the network. Similarly, in the case of a transitional regulation introduced following liberalization, the aim is to establish competition, the principle of which has been declared by the liberalization law. When this is not clearly stated, there is a lapse in the legislative art.
Publications
🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Articulation systémique entre Vigilance, Due diligence, conformité et Compliance : la Vigilance, part totale de l’Obligation de Compliance", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2024, à paraître
____
📝lire l'article
____
🚧lire le document de travail bilingue sur la base duquel cet article a été élaboré, doté de développements supplémentaires, de références techniques et de liens hypertextes
____
📕lire une présentation générale de l'ouvrage, L'obligation de Compliance, dans lequel cet article est publié
____
► Résumé de l'article : Le "devoir de vigilance" déchaine d'autant plus de positions radicales et passionnées, parfois chez les professeurs de droit, qu'il n'a pas été défini. L'on emploie un mot pour un autre, par mégarde ou par dessein, par dessein si l'on peut attirer tel ou tel élément d'un régime juridique de l'on convoite, par mégarde car c'est souvent par inadvertance que les mots du Droit sont maltraités. L'exercice même de définition, notamment celui très périlleux de "devoir" étant mené dans la partie de l'ouvrage visant à "cerner l'obligation de compliance", il s'agit ici de démêler ce que l'on semble utiliser l'un pour l'autre : la vigilance, le duty of care, la due diligence.
La loi française de 2017 dite "Vigilance" reprenant les dispositifs techniques de la loi de 2016 dite "Sapin 2", avec les plans, les audits, etc., cela renvoie au Droit de la compliance, auquel l'on substitue souvent le terme de "conformité", avec des conséquences pratiques très dommageables, comme on le fit il y a 20 ans quand on affirmait que le "Droit de la Régulation" devait être dénommé le "Droit de la réglementation"
Chacun de ces termes renvoient à des notions différentes. Le Législateur n'aide pas puisqu'il les utilisent souvent les uns pour les autres, le passage entre l'anglais et le français valant circonstance atténuante mais laissant le dysfonctionnement entier.
Il convient donc tout d'abord de redonner à chacun de ces termes juridiques leur signification (I). Il apparaît ainsi que le la Vigilance est la "pointe avancée" du Droit de la Compliance, lequel ayant été distingué de ce qui n'est que son outil, à savoir la "conformité".
En effet, la Vigilance est une "pointe avancée en ce qu'elle est qui donne plus de visibilité à un système plus vaste qu'est le Droit de la Compliance, ce qui justifie donc un esprit de système et implique une méthode de réalisation du Droit qui est ici de nature téléologique, puisque le Droit de la Complique puise sa normativité dans les Buts Monumentaux, ce dont la technique de vigilance donne un exemple éclatant à travers le souci de l'environnement et des droits subjectifs de la personne (II).
A partir de ces bases méthodologiques, il est possible de s'extraire de la masse réglementaire qui prolifère dans les sujets de vigilance qui ne sont en rien limités à la loi de 2017, pour traiter les sujets impliqués par la Vigilance en la replaçant dans le système du Droit de la Compliance, sans la pulvériser dans toutes les réglementations sectorielles où elle est déjà très présente ni être suspendu à l'adoption ou pas à la Directive européennes, ni se demander si un juge ou un autre va décider d'une façon ou d'une autre.
En effet, ce Droit de la Compliance produit ce que j'ai pu qualifier de "causes systémiques", qui sont portées devant le juge, notamment par des parties prenantes, ce qui est en train de produire un renouvellement de l'office du juge (III). En raison d'un activisme judiciaire d'organisations, c'est par cette pointe avancée de la Vigilance que l'ensemble du Droit de la Compliance est en train de mettre le Juge au centre, comme cela fût montré dans l'ouvrage de 2023 La juridictionnalisation de la compliance, puis repris par le Conseil d'Etat et la Cour de cassation dans l'ouvrage à paraître De la Régulation à la Compliance : la place du juge.
L'évolution du Droit positif confirme que la Vigilance est donc la "part totale" du Droit de la Compliance.
________
mafr, Compliance et conformité : les distinguer pour mieux les articuler, 2024.
Thesaurus : Doctrine
► Référence complète : A. Lyon-Caen, "Querelle de mots", RDT, 2023, p. 665
____
🦉Cet article est accessible en texte intégral pour les personnes inscrites aux enseignements de la Professeure Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
________
Thesaurus : Doctrine
Référence complète : Boy, , "Réflexion sur le "droit de la régulation". A propos du texte de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche", D., chron., 2001, p.3031 et s.
____
Oct. 9, 2024
MAFR TV : MAFR TV - Surplomb
🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR. Regulation, Compliance, Law
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter Surplomb, par MAFR
____
► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Les Buts Monumentaux, ancrage normatif de la Compliance", in série de vidéos Surplomb, 9 octobre 2024
____
🌐visionner sur LinkedIn cette vidéo de la série Surplomb
____
____
🎬visionner ci-dessous cette vidéo de la série Surplomb⤵️
____
July 10, 2024
Publications
🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR. Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Devoir de vigilance : progresser" (Duty of vigilance: the way forward), in A. Bres & C. Maubernard (dir.), Le devoir de vigilance des entreprises : l'âge de la maturité ? (The duty of vigilance: the age of maturity?), Bruylant, coll. "Droit & Economie", to be published.
____
📝read the article (in French)
____
🚧 read the bilingual Working Pape on which this article has been made, with more developments, technical references and hypertext links.
____
► English summary of this article: 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.
________
June 14, 2024
Publications
.🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn
🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Designing the Uniqueness of the Compliance Obligation without diluting it, June 2024.
____
📝This working paper was drawn up to serve as the basis for the second introductory article in the book Compliance Obligation, the first having presented all the contributions to the book.
____
► Summary of this Working Paper: Des
____
🔓lire le document de travail ci-dessous⤵️
Updated: March 15, 2024 (Initial publication: Nov. 30, 2023)
Publications
🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Births of a branch of Law: Compliance Law, Working Paper, November 2023.
____
📕This Working Paper was drawn up as a contribution to the collective book given to Professor Louis Vogel (given on October 2024)
____
► Summary of this Working Paper: The study looks at the various movements that have given birth to Compliance Law, with particular emphasis on Competition Law.
After a preliminary reflection on the construction of the legal system into branches of Law, their classification in relation to each other, the difficulty encountered in this respect by Economic Law, and the various movements that give birth to one of them, the diversity of which the branch subsequently keeps track of, the study is constructed in 4 parts.
To find out what gave rise to Compliance Law, the first part invites us to reject the narrow perspective of a definition that is content to define it by the fact of "being conform" with all the applicable regulations. This has the effect of increasing the efficacy of the regulations, but it does not produce a branch of Law, being just a set of tools like others.
The second part of the study aims to shed some light on what appears to be an "enigma", as it is often claimed that this is the result of a soft method, or of an American political decision, or of as many regulations as there are occasions to make. Instead, it appears that in the United States, in the aftermath of the 1929 crisis, it was a decision of establishing an authority and rules to prevent another atrocious collapse of the system, while in Europe in 1978, in memory of the use of files of personal and racial information, it was a question of establishing an authority and rules to prevent an atrocious attack on human rights. A common element that aims for the future ("never again") but not the same object of preventive rejection. This difference between the two births explains the uniqueness and diversity of the two Compliance Laws, the tensions that can exist between the two, and the impossibility of obtaining a global Law.
The third part analyses the way in which Competition Law has given rise to conformity: a secondary branch which is a guarantee of conformity with competition rules. Developed in particular through the soft law issued by the competition authorities, the result is a kind of soft obedience, a well-understood collaboration of the procedural type through which the firm educates, monitors and even sanctions, without leaving the cercle of Competition Law, of which conformity is an appendix. The distance between a culture of conformity and the substantial Compliance Law can be measured here.
The fourth part aims to show that Competition Law and Compliance Law are two autonomous and articulated branches of Law. Since Compliance Law is a branch of Law built on Monumental Goals, in particular the sustainability of systems and the preservation of the human beings involved so that they are not crushed by them but benefit from them, the current challenge of European integration is to build the pillar of Compliance Law alongside the competitive pillar. Jurisdictions are in the process of doing this and of linking the two.
____
🔓read the Working Paper below⤵️
Feb. 19, 2024
Publications
🌐 follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Compliance and conformity: distinguishing them to articulate them, Working Paper, February 2024.
____
📝 this working paper was drawn up to serve as a basis for the article published in French in the Chronique MAFR - Compliance Law, published in the Recueil Dalloz.
____
► Summary of this Working Paper: The words "conformité" and "compliance" are sometimes used interchangeably, presenting "conformité" as the translation into good legal French vocabulary of "compliance", which would come from the American system. This is not true, however, because each of these terms refers to two distinct and even opposing concepts.
"conformity"' would require companies to show that they are actively obeying all the 'regulations' applicable to them, regardless of their content. "Compliance Law" is a new substantial branch of Law that derives its normativity from the "Monumental Goals" targeted by the political and public authorities: these monumental goals are intended to ensure that systems do not collapse in the future (Negative Monumental Goals), or even improve (Positive Monumental Goals). The systems concerned are banking, finance, energy, health, transport, digital and climate systems. The scope of Compliance Law is therefore both much more limited and more ambitious.
Distinguishing between the two allows us to put conformity back where it belongs, as a tool of Compliance Law. As such, conformity justifies the collation and correlation of information, with the algorithmic system playing a major role in this. On the other hand, the human concern that underpins Compliance Law justifies making training and the actions of in-house lawyers, attorneys and judges, central to it. The evidentiary system of Compliance that is currently being developed is based on evidentiary techniques rooted on the one hand in the tool of conformity and on the other in the culture of Compliance, which can be articulated as soon as they are no longer confused.
____
🔓read the working paper below⤵️
Feb. 9, 2024
Conferences
🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Préalable : ce qu'est l'obligation de Compliance" ("Prerequisite: the Compliance Obligation"), in L. Aynès, M.-A. Frison-Roche, J.-B. Racine and E. Silva-Romero (dir.), L'arbitrage international en renfort de l'obligation de Compliance (International Arbitration in support of the Compliance Obligation), Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Institute of World Business Law of the ICC (Institute), Conseil Économique Social et Environnemental (CESE), Paris, February 9, 2024
____
🧮see the full programme of this event
____
🌐consult on LinkedIn a general presentation of this event, which links to a presentation of each speech (in French)
____
____
🔲see the slides used to support the presentation (in French)
____
🎤see a presentation of the conference "Préalable : ce qu'est un engagement" ("Prerequisite: the Commitment"), given at the same symposium
____
🎤see a presentation of the conference "Le renforcement des engagements de Compliance par le renvoi Ex Ante à l'arbitrage international" ("Reinforcing Compliance commitments by referring Ex Ante to International Arbitration") which was finally not pronounced but will be the subject of an 📝article in the forthcoming book 📘Compliance Obligation
____
► Presentation of the conference: I have first dealt with the very definition of the Compliance Obligation.
After showing that the relationship between Compliance Law and International Arbitration will naturally develop, because the companies subject to it are international, because they contractualise their legal Compliance obligations and because Compliance is being jurisdictionalised📎
This culture of compliance is achieved either through compliance contracts📎
The obligation of Compliance which then takes concrete form consists for the company not in making effective Ex Ante all the regulations which apply to it (conception of conformity which is at once unreasonable, blind and impossible), but in making its best efforts, which it must make visible (see Compliance Evidence System📎
These Monumental Goals are systemic. The aim is to protect systems from collapse (Negative Monumental Goals) or to make them better (Positive Monumental Goals)📎
The role of the Judge, and therefore also that of the Arbitrator, is renewed.
________
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, 2024.
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝The Judge, the Compliance Obligation and the Company. The Compliance Evidence System, in 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, 2024.
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Compliance Monumental Goals, Beating Heart of Compliance Law, in🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Monumental Goals, 2023.
Feb. 9, 2024
Conferences
🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Préalable : ce qu'est un engagement" ("Prerequisite: the Commitment"), in L. Aynès, M.-A. Frison-Roche, J.-B. Racine and E. Silva-Romero (dir.), L'arbitrage international en renfort de l'obligation de Compliance (International Arbitration in support of the Compliance Obligation), Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Institute of World Business Law of the ICC (Institute), Conseil Économique Social et Environnemental (CESE), Paris, February 9, 2024
____
🧮see the full programme of this event
____
🌐consult on LinkedIn a general presentation of this event, which links to a presentation of each speech (in French)
____
____
🔲see the slides used to support the presentation (in French)
____
🎤see a presentation of the conference "Préalable : ce qu'est l'Obligation de Compliance" ("Prerequisite: what is the Compliance Obligation"), given at the same symposium
____
🎤see a presentation of the conference "Le renforcement des engagements de Compliance par le renvoi Ex Ante à l'arbitrage international" ("Reinforcing Compliance commitments by referring Ex Ante to International Arbitration") which was finally not pronounced but will be the subject of an 📝article in the forthcoming book 📘Compliance Obligation
____
► Presentation of the conference: Having defined the Compliance Obligation in "Préalable : ce qu'est l'Obligation de Compliance" ("Prerequisite: what is the Compliance Obligation"), I set out to define what a commitment is.
No one doubts that commitments, as words, constitute facts that can engage the liability of companies if there are inconsistencies or lies. The question today is whether a commitment can constitute a legal act, binding in ex ante.
Companies make commitments either to fulfil their legal Compliance obligations, which is simply obeying the law, or to express their own wishes, either for themselves or for others. The cases are often confused, even though the scope is not the same.
If the commitment takes the form of a contract, Compliance is concerned if the contract is used as an Ex Ante Compliance Tool📎
The commitment, a concept that comes more from the Economics of Regulation, was conceived between a Regulatory Authority and a Company: it is the unilateral decision of the Authority that gives legal force to the commitment. Case law confirms this (Conseil d'État (French Council of State)📎
If commitment is central to Compliance, particularly Vigilance, it is because Compliance Law is an extension of Regulatory Law📎
In drawing up a plan, the company is fulfilling its legal obligation. But if we were to consider that it is a commitment, then we would also have to consider that the plan is the result of its will, that it must consult the stakeholders in its preparation, but that the source of the plan is its will: the provisions are not stipulations, are not applications of the law, but unilateral voluntary provisions.
In this respect, and because its source is the will of the company (which does not prevent its co-construction), a plan could contain a "graduated offer" of arbitration.
This offer could be included in commitments that are less regulated by law, such as those made in the context of CSR.
________
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Tools, 2021.
Feb. 9, 2024
Conferences
🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le renforcement des engagements de Compliance par le renvoi Ex Ante à l'arbitrage international" ("Reinforcing Compliance commitments by referring Ex Ante to International Arbitration"), in L. Aynès, M.-A. Frison-Roche, J.-B. Racine and E. Silva-Romero (dir.), L'arbitrage international en renfort de l'obligation de Compliance (International Arbitration in support of the Compliance Obligation), Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Institute of World Business Law of the ICC (Institute), Conseil Économique Social et Environnemental (CESE), Paris, February 9, 2024
____
🧮see the full programme of this event
____
🌐consult on LinkedIn a general presentation of this event, which links to a presentation of each speech (in French)
____
____
🔲see the slides used to support the presentation (in French)
____
📝This conference and the Working Paper on which it is based are to be linked with the article to be published in the book📘Compliance Obligation
____
🎤see a presentation of the conference "Préalable : ce qu'est l'Obligation de Compliance" ("Prerequisite: what is the Compliance Obligation"), given at the same symposium
____
🎤see a presentation of the conference "Préalable : ce qu'est un engagement" ("Prerequisite: the Commitment"), given at the same symposium
____
► Presentation of the conference: It was initially planned that I would speak on the subject Le renforcement des engagements de Compliance par le renvoi Ex Ante à l'arbitrage international (Reinforcing Compliance commitments through the Ex Ante referral to International Arbitration), but it was agreed with the other organisers of the symposium that after defining the concept of the Compliance Obligation📎
________
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🎤Préalable : ce qu'est l'obligation de Compliance (Prerequisite: the Compliance Obligation), in 🧮L'arbitrage international en renfort de l'obligation de Compliance (International Arbitration in support of the Compliance Obligation), 2024.
M.-A. Frison-Roche, Préalable : ce qu'est un engagement
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🎤Préalable : ce qu'est un engagement (Prerequisite: the Commitment), in 🧮L'arbitrage international en renfort de l'obligation de Compliance (International Arbitration in support of the Compliance Obligation), 2024.
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🚧Compliance and Trust, 2017.
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 🚧Conceiving Power, 2021.
Feb. 1, 2024
Conferences
🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Droit de la compliance : tour d'horizon" ("Compliance Law: Overview"), in 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, 2024.
____
► This conference is given in French
____
🧮see the full programme of this event (in French)
____
🌐consult on LinkedIn a general presentation of this event, which links to a presentation of each speech (in French)
____
____
🔲see the slides used to support the presentation (in French)
____
🎤see a presentation of the other speech about "Compliance et Responsabilité civile : comprendre et raison garder" ("Compliance and Civil Liability: understanding and keeping our heads"), given at the same symposium
____
► Presentation of the conference: Compliance Law is mysterious in itself, because it is still in creation📎
Because the purpose of this conference is to introduce the two days of a training course designed for magistrates and open to lawyers, it only provides an "overview" of, so that we do not get lost in the sprawling regulations, the global mechanisms and the political ambitions that permeate them.
Therefore, without going into any of the subjects, it is about opening up four ways of entering what is a branch of Law that is being born before our eyes:
1. Understanding Compliance Law through "regulations"
2. Understanding Compliance Law through "tools"📎
3. Understanding Compliance Law through "methods"
4. Understanding Compliance Law through "goals"📎
The four approches are legitimate because the four dimensions are articulated in the legal system, notably case law.
But the more positive Law is consolidated, the more its normativity through the goals that give normativity, or even a simplicity without which the whole is not humanly controllable.
These Goals are Monumental and Europe bears them more and better than other areas of the world📎
________
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Naissance d'une branche du Droit : le Droit de la Compliance (Birth of a branch of Law : Compliance Law), to be published.
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, 2023.
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Tools, 2020.
🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📘Compliance Monumental Goals, 2023.
June 6, 2023
Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation
♾️suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn
♾️s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance : obligation, devoir, pouvoir, culture (colloque 13 et 14 juin 2023)", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 6 juin 2023.
____
📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation
____
🔴 Comprendre l'Obligation de Compliance afin d'en maîtriser la pratique (colloque des 13 et 14 juin 2023 du Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC), du Centre de recherche sur la justice et le règlement des conflits (CRJ) et du Centre de recherche en économie et droit (CRED) de l'Université Paris Panthéon-Assas).
La compliance parait inmaîtrisable dans sa diversité et son ampleur et l'on doute parfois de sa juridicité.
Pour favoriser la maîtrise de cette pratique et construire le Droit de la Compliance, il est essentiel de mieux cerner l'Obligation de compliance.
C'est l'objet de ce colloque.
____
📧lire l'article ⤵️
April 23, 2023
Thesaurus : Doctrine
► Référence complète : F. Vessio, « Réflexion sur les critères de définition de la compliance - Approche restrictive à l'aune du droit positif », JCP E 2023, n° 23, p. 1177
____
🦉Cet article est accessible en texte intégral pour les personnes inscrites aux enseignements de la professeure Marie-Anne Frison-Roche
________
March 15, 2023
Publications
♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance Monumental Goals, beating heart of Compliance Law", in M.A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Monumental Goals, series "Compliance & Regulation", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, 2023, p.
___
► Article Summary: Compliance Law can be defined as the set of processes requiring companies to show that they comply with all the regulations that apply to them. It is also possible to define this branch of Law by a normative heart: the "Monumental Goals". These explain the technical new legal solutions, thus made them clearer, accessible and anticipable. This definition is also based on a bet, that of caring for others that human beings can have in common, a form of universality.
Through the Monumental Goals, appears a definition of Compliance Law that is new, original, and specific. This new term "Compliance", even in non-English vocabulary, in fact designates a new ambition: that a systemic catastrophe shall not be repeated in the future. This Monumental Goal was designed by History, which gives it a different dimension in the United States and in Europe. But the heart is common in the West, because it is always about detecting and preventing what could produce a future systemic catastrophe, which falls under "negative monumental goals", even to act so that the future is positively different ("positive monumental goals"), the whole being articulated in the notion of "concern for others", the Monumental Goals thus unifying Compliance Law.
In this, they reveal and reinforce the always systemic nature of Compliance Law, as management of systemic risks and extension of Regulation Law, outside of any sector, which makes solutions available for non-sector spaces, in particular digital space. Because wanting to prevent the future (preventing evil from happening; making good happen) is by nature political, Compliance Law by nature concretizes ambitions of a political nature, in particular in its positive monumental goals, notably effective equality between human beings, including geographically distant or future human beings.
The practical consequences of this definition of Compliance Law by Monumental Goals are immense. A contrario, this makes it possible to avoid the excesses of a "conformity law" aimed at the effectiveness of all applicable regulations, an extremely dangerous perspective. This makes it possible to select effective Compliance Tools regarding these goals, to grasp the spirit of the material without being locked into its flow of letters. This leads to not dissociating the power required of companies and the permanent supervision that the public authorities must exercise over them.
We can therefore expect a lot from such a definition of Compliance Law by its Monumental Goals. It engenders an alliance between the Political Power, legitimate to enact the Monumental Goals, and the crucial operators, in a position to concretize them and appointed because they are able to do so. It makes it possible to find global legal solutions for global systemic difficulties that are a priori insurmountable, particularly in climate matters and for the effective protection of people in the now digital world in which we live. It expresses values that can unite human beings.
In this, Compliance Law built on Monumental Goals is also a bet. Even if the requirement of "conformity" is articulated with this present conception of what Compliance Law is, this conception based on Monumental Law is based on the human ability to be free, while conformity law supposes more the human ability to obey.
Therefore, Compliance Law, defined by the Monumental Goals, is essential for our future, while conformity law is not.
____
🚧 read the bilingual Working Papier, with more technical developments, references, and links
____
📘read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Monumental Goal, in which this article is published.
________
► read the presentations of the other Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's contributions in this book:
📝Definition of Principe of Proportionality and Definition of Compliance Law,
📝 Role and Place of Companies in the Creation and Effectiveness of Compliance Law in Crisis,
Sept. 1, 2022
Publications
♾️follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
♾️subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Les Buts Monumentaux, cœur battant du Droit de la Compliance" ("Monumental Goals, beating heart of Compliance Law"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2022, p. 21-44.
____
📝read the article (in French)
____
🚧read the bilingual Working Paper which is the basis of this article, with additional developments, technical references and hyperlinks
____
📕read a general presentation of the book, Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, in which this article is published
____
► Summary of the article: Compliance Law can be defined as the set of processes requiring companies to show that they comply with all the regulations that apply to them. It is also possible to define this branch of Law by a normative heart: the "Monumental Goals". These explain the technical new legal solutions, thus made them clearer, accessible and anticipable. This definition is also based on a bet, that of caring for others that human beings can have in common, a universality.
Through the Monumental Goals, appears a definition of Compliance Law that is new, original, and specific. This new term "Compliance", even in non-English vocabulary, in fact designates a new ambition: that a systemic catastrophe shall not be repeated in the future. This Monumental Goal was designed by History, which gives it a different dimension in the United States and in Europe. But the heart is common in the West, because it is always about detecting and preventing what could produce a future systemic catastrophe, which falls under "negative monumental goals", even to act so that the future is positively different ("positive monumental goals"), the whole being articulated in the notion of "concern for others", the Monumental Goals thus unifying Compliance Law.
In this, they reveal and reinforce the always systemic nature of Compliance Law, as management of systemic risks and extension of Regulation Law, outside of any sector, which makes solutions available for non-sector spaces, in particular digital space. Because wanting to prevent the future (preventing evil from happening; making good happen) is by nature political, Compliance Law by nature concretizes ambitions of a political nature, in particular in its positive monumental goals, notably effective equality between human beings, including geographically distant or future human beings.
The practical consequences of this definition of Compliance Law by Monumental Goals are immense. A contrario, this makes it possible to avoid the excesses of a "conformity law" aimed at the effectiveness of all applicable regulations, a very dangerous perspective. This makes it possible to select effective Compliance Tools with regard to these goals, to grasp the spirit of the material without being locked into its flow of letters. This leads to not dissociating the power required of companies and the permanent supervision that the public authorities must exercise over them.
We can therefore expect a lot from such a definition of Compliance Law by its Monumental Goals. It engenders an alliance between the Political Power, legitimate to enact the Monumental Goals, and the crucial operators, in a position to concretize them and appointed because they are able to do so. It makes it possible to find global legal solutions for global systemic difficulties that are a priori insurmountable, particularly in climate matters and for the effective protection of people in the now digital world in which we live. It expresses values that can unite human beings.
In this, Compliance Law built on Monumental Goals is also a bet. Even if the requirement of "conformity" is articulated with this present conception of what Compliance Law is, this conception based on Monumental Law is based on the human ability to be free, while conformity law supposes more the human ability to obey.
Therefore Compliance Law, defined by the Monumental Goals, is essential for our future, while conformity law is not.
________
April 14, 2022
Publications
♾️ suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn
♾️ s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Référence complète : Frison-Roche, M.-A., Les Buts Monumentaux, cœur battant du Droit de la Compliance, in Frison-Roche, M.-A. (dir.), Les buts monumentaux de la Compliance, collection "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Dalloz, à paraître.
____
► lire le document de travail sur lequel cet article est basé
___
► Résumé de l'article : L'on peut définir cette branche du droit comme l'ensemble des procédés obligeant les entreprises à donner à voir qu'elles respectent l'ensemble des réglementations qui s'appliquent à elles. L'on peut aussi définir cette branche par un cœur normatif : les "buts monumentaux". Ceux-ci permettent de rendre compte du droit positif nouveau, rendu ainsi plus clair, accessible et anticipable. Ils reposent sur un pari, celui du souci de l'autre que les êtres humains peuvent avoir en commun, forme d'universalité.
Par les Buts Monumentaux, apparaît une définition du Droit de la Compliance qui est nouvelle, originale et spécifique. Ce terme nouveau de "Compliance" désigne en effet une ambition nouvelle : que ne se renouvelle pas à l'avenir une catastrophe systémique. Ce But Monumental a été dessiné par l'Histoire, ce qui lui donne une dimension différente aux États-Unis et en Europe. Mais le cœur est commun en Occident, car il s'agit toujours de détecter et de prévenir ce qui pourrait produire une catastrophe systémique future, ce qui relève de "buts monumentaux négatifs", voire d'agir pour que l'avenir soit différent positivement ("buts monumentaux positifs"), l'ensemble s'articulant dans la notion de "souci d'autrui", les Buts Monumentaux unifiant ainsi le Droit de la Compliance.
En cela, ils révèlent et renforcent la nature toujours systémique du Droit de la compliance, comme gestion des risques systémiques et prolongement du Droit de la Régulation, en dehors de tout secteur, ce qui rend disponibles des solutions pour les espaces non-sectoriels, notamment l'espace numérique. Parce que vouloir empêcher le futur (faire qu'un mal n'advienne pas ; faire qu'un bien advienne) est par nature politique. Le Droit de la Compliance concrétise par nature des ambitions de nature politique, notamment dans ses buts monumentaux positifs, notamment l'égalité effectif entre les êtres humains, y compris les êtres humains géographiquement lointains ou futurs.
Les conséquences pratiques de cette définition du Droit de la Compliance par les Buts Monumentaux sont immenses. A contrario, cela permet d'éviter les excès d'un "droit de la conformité" visant à l'effectivité de toutes les réglementations applicables, perspective très dangereuse. Cela permet de sélectionner les outils efficaces au regard de ces buts, de saisir l'esprit de la matière sans être enfermé dans son flot de lettres. Cela conduit à ne pas dissocier la puissance requise des entreprises et la supervision permanente que les autorités publiques doivent exercer sur celles-ci.
L'on peut donc attendre beaucoup d'une telle définition du Droit de la Compliance par ses Buts Monumentaux. Elle engendre une alliance entre le Politique, légitime à édicter les Buts Monumentaux, et les opérateurs cruciaux, en position de les concrétiser et désignés parce qu'aptes à le faire. Elle permet de dégager des solutions juridiques globales pour des difficultés systémiques globales a priori insurmontables, notamment en matière climatique et pour la protection effective des personnes dans le monde désormais numérique où nous vivons. Elle exprime des valeurs pouvant réunir les êtres humains.
En cela, le Droit de la Compliance construit sur les Buts Monumentaux constitue aussi un pari. Même si l'exigence de "conformité" s'articule avec cette conception d'avance de ce qu'est le Droit de la Compliance, celui-ci repose sur l'aptitude humaine à être libre, alors que la conformité suppose davantage l'aptitude humaine à obéir.
C'est pourquoi le Droit de la Compliance, défini par les Buts Monumentaux, est essentiel pour notre avenir, alors que le droit de la conformité ne l'est pas.
____
📝 lire la présentation générale du livre, Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, dans lequel l'article est publié.
_____
► Lire les présentations des autres contributions de Marie-Anne Frison-Roche dans cet ouvrage :
📝 Les Buts Monumentaux, cœur battant du Droit de la Compliance,
________
Sept. 16, 2021
Publications
Full Reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Notes pour une synthèse sur le vif pour le colloque "Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance : radioscopie d'une notion" (Notes for an on the fly synthesis for the Colloquium "The Compliance Monumental Goals: Radioscopy for a Notion"), September 16, 2021.
____
► Read the general programme of the Colloquium Compliance Law Monumental Goals
► Read the presentation of the synthesis Report, notably its Summary.
____
► Methodology: The topic is not treated in a strictly personal point of view, as it will be in the book on The Compliance Monumental Goals, in an article devoted to "Defining Compliance Monumental Goals and their branch of Law", more personal article. It will be even more clearly the expression of a personal vision of the definition of what is "Compliance" and what is "Compliance Law", with in particular the distinctions that should be done, in particular with "conformity" because these are these "Monumental Goals", a notion proposed in 2016!footnote-2164 which makes it possible to distinguish the procedural notion of "conformity" (just obey) and the substantive notion of "Compliance Law". This article will include the multiple academic and technical references that should be done to do this.
But in the time allotted in a day's collloquium and because the purpose of a synthesis is to highlight on the spot what was common in the contributions heard, the document is based only on the different speechs made and is not enriched with technical references, nor does it refer to personal works.
____
🔻read below the notes exhaustely taken
Sept. 2, 2021
Interviews
► Référence complète : Frison-Roche, M.-A.,La nouvelle loi de protection des données en Chine est un « anti-RGPD », entretien avec Olivia Dufour, Actu-Juridique, 2 septembre 2021.
____
Les 3 questions posées étaient :
❓ La Chine a adopté fin août une grande loi de protection des données personnelles. Celle-ci est présenté dans les médias comme un équivalent de notre RGPD. Est-ce le cas ?
La réponse est : non.
(lire la réponse développée dans l'entretien)
____
❓ S'agit-il de simples effets indésirables ou bien du but poursuivi par le Législateur ?
La réponse est : Le but du Législateur n'est pas d'armer l'individu contre le pouvoir de l'Etat, c'est au contraire d'accroître le pouvoir de l'Etat, éventuellement contre lui.
(lire la réponse développée dans l'entretien)
____
❓ Si la compliance peut servir les intérêts d'Etats non-démocratiques, c'est donc qu'elle est potentiellement dangereuse ?
La réponse est : elle n'est dangereuse que définie comme "méthode d'efficacité des règles ; il faut définir le Droit de la Compliance par son "but monumental" qui est la protection des personnes. La contradiction de la loi chinoise nouvelle apparaît alors.
(lire la réponse développée dans l'entretien)
____
Aug. 25, 2021
Publications
🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn
🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law
____
► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, M.-A., Monumental Goals, beating heart of Compliance Law, Working Paper, August 2021
____
📝This Working Paper is the basis for the article, "Les buts monumentaux, cœur battant du droit de la compliance", constituting the introduction ⤵
📕in its French version, of the book Les buts monumentaux de la Compliance, in the Series 📚Régulations & Compliance
📘in its English version, of the book, Compliance Monumental Goals, in the Series 📚Compliance & Regulation
____
► Summary of the Working Paper:
Compliance Law can be defined as the set of processes requiring companies to show that they comply with all the regulations that apply to them. It is also possible to define this branch of Law by a normative heart: the "Monumental Goals". These explain the technical new legal solutions, thus made them clearer, accessible and anticipable. This definition is also based on a bet, that of caring for others that human beings can have in common, a universality.
Through the Monumental Goals, appears a definition of Compliance Law that is new, original, and specific. This new term "Compliance", even in non-English vocabulary, in fact designates a new ambition: that a systemic catastrophe shall not be repeated in the future. This Monumental Goal was designed by History, which gives it a different dimension in the United States and in Europe. But the heart is common in the West, because it is always about detecting and preventing what could produce a future systemic catastrophe, which falls under "negative monumental goals", even to act so that the future is positively different ("positive monumental goals"), the whole being articulated in the notion of "concern for others", the Monumental Goals thus unifying Compliance Law.
In this, they reveal and reinforce the always systemic nature of Compliance Law, as management of systemic risks and extension of Regulation Law, outside of any sector, which makes solutions available for non-sector spaces, in particular digital space. Because wanting to prevent the future (preventing evil from happening; making good happen) is by nature political, Compliance Law by nature concretizes ambitions of a political nature, in particular in its positive monumental goals, notably effective equality between human beings, including geographically distant or future human beings.
The practical consequences of this definition of Compliance Law by Monumental Goals are immense. A contrario, this makes it possible to avoid the excesses of a "conformity law" aimed at the effectiveness of all applicable regulations, a very dangerous perspective. This makes it possible to select effective Compliance Tools with regard to these goals, to grasp the spirit of the material without being locked into its flow of letters. This leads to not dissociating the power required of companies and the permanent supervision that the public authorities must exercise over them.
We can therefore expect a lot from such a definition of Compliance Law by its Monumental Goals. It engenders an alliance between the Political Power, legitimate to enact the Monumental Goals, and the crucial operators, in a position to concretize them and appointed because they are able to do so. It makes it possible to find global legal solutions for global systemic difficulties that are a priori insurmountable, particularly in climate matters and for the effective protection of people in the now digital world in which we live. It expresses values that can unite human beings.
In this, Compliance Law built on Monumental Goals is also a bet. Even if the requirement of "conformity" is articulated with this present conception of what Compliance Law is, this conception based on Monumental Law is based on the human ability to be free, while conformity law supposes more the human ability to obey.
Therefore Compliance Law, defined by the Monumental Goals, is essential for our future, while conformity law is not.
________
Read the developments below⤵️
March 17, 2021
Conferences
Full reference : Frison-Roche, M.-A., The Potential of Compliance Law (Les potentialités du Droit de la Compliance), conference given to Muriel Fabre-Magnan's students, Paris I, 17th of March 2021.
_____
This conference has been designed for Paris I's students following a Law cursus, specialized in Law of obligations and especially in Tort Law.
It therefore aims to show the technical content of Compliance Law and what it can become.
It has been followed by a debate with students.
Summary: Compliance Law is a branch of Law in the process of being born. We can be sure of its existence in the French positive Law, through the technical examination of laws called "Sapin 2" (2016) and "Vigilance" (2017). It appears at radically new. It is the reason why it is perceived as an attack, especially from United-States and we rather use legal knowledge to counter it. But if we study the historical reasons of its adoption in the United-States and the "monumental goals", whether they are negative (what should not appear in the future) or positive (what should appear in the future), we can measure that this Law, which is essentially Ex Ante could be the means through which scattered but legitimate public authorities and powerful but illegitimate big firms could ally. Therefore potentially Compliance Law could be the worst, simple tool of obedience (mechanical "conformité") or the best: what through which we could do something face to global problems, like global warming, or what we would accept to look in the face: the care for others.
Read the slides on which this conference was based (in French)
Feb. 9, 2021
Conferences
Full reference : Frison-Roche, M.-A., Devoir de vigilance des entreprises : vers un Droit de la responsabilité ex ante ? (Duty of vigilance for companies: towards an ex ante liability law?), conference-debate, The Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Norway, 9th of February 2021.
The conference-debate is moderated by Catherine Banet, Associate Professor, Scandinavian Insitute of Maritime Law, Department of Energy and Resources Law, University of Oslo