🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Obligation de Compliance : construire une structure de compliance produisant des effets crédibles au regard des Buts Monumentaux visés par le Législateur" (Compliance Obligation: build a compliance structure producing credible effects in the perspective of the Monumental Goals targeted by the Legislator), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.3-44.

____

► This article is the introduction to the book

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on the basis this article has been written, with more developments, technical references and hyperlinks

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published

📚see the general presentation of the series "Régulations & Compliance" in which this book is published

____

► English Summary of this contribution: This article explains what companies' Compliance Obligation" is. Delving into the mass of compliance obligations, it uses the method of classification of those that are subject to an obligation of result and those that are subject to an obligation of means. It justifies the choice of this essential criterion, which changes the objects and the burden of proof of companies that are subject to an obligation of result when it comes to setting up "compliance structures" and are subject to an obligation of means when it comes to the effects produced by these compliance structures.

Indeed, rather than getting bogged down in definitional disputes, given that Compliance Law is itself a nascent branch of Law, the idea of this contribution is to take as a starting point the different legal regimes of so many different compliance obligations to which laws and regulations subject large companies: sometimes they have to apply them to the letter and sometimes they are only sanctioned in the event of fault or negligence. This brings us back to the distinction between obligations of result and obligations of means.

Although it would be risky to transpose the expression and regime of contractual obligations to legal obligations put by legislation, starting from this observation in the evidentiary system of compliance of a plurality of obligations of means and of result, depending on whether it is a question of this or that technical compliance obligation, we must first classify them. It would then appear that this plurality will not constitute a definitive obstacle to the constitution of a single definition of the Compliance Obligation. On the contrary, it makes it possible to clarify the situation, to trace the paths through what is so often described as a legal jumble, an unmanageable "mass of regulations".

Indeed, insofar as the company obliged under Compliance Law participates in the achievement of the Monumental Goals on which this is normatively based, a legal obligation which may be relayed by contract or even by ethics, it can only be an obligation of means, by virtue of this very teleological nature and the scale of the goals targeted, for example the happy outcome of the climate crisis which is beginning or the desired effective equality between human beings. This established principle leaves room for the fact that the behaviour required is marked out by processes put in place by structured tools, most often legally described, for example the establishment of a vigilance plan or regularly organised training courses (effectiveness), are obligations of result, while the positive effects produced by this plan or these training courses (effaciety) are obligations of means. This is even more the case when the Goal is to transform the system as a whole, i.e. to ensure that the system is solidly based, that there is a culture of equality, and that everyone respects everyone else, all of which come under the heading of efficiency.

The Compliance Obligation thus appears unified because, gradually, and whatever the various compliance obligations in question, their intensity or their sector, its structural process prerequisites are first and foremost structures to be established which the Law, through the Judge in particular, will require to be put in place but will not require anything more, whereas striving towards the achievement of the aforementioned Monumental Goals will be an obligation of means, which may seem lighter, but corresponds to an immeasurable ambition, commensurate with these Goals. In addition, because these structures (alert mechanisms, training, audits, contracts and clauses, etc.)  have real meaning if they are to produce effects and behaviours that lead to changes converging towards the Monumental Goals, it is the obligations of means that are most important and not the obligations of result. The judge must also take this into account.

Finally, the Compliance Obligation, which therefore consists of this interweaving of multiple compliance obligations of result and means of using the entreprise's position, ultimately Goals at system efficiency, in Europe at system civilisation, for which companies must show not so much that they have followed the processes correctly (result) but that this has produced effects that converge with the Goals sought by the legislator (effects produced according to a credible trajectory). This is how a crucial company, responsible Ex Ante, should organise itself and behave.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Obligation sur Obligation vaut" ("Obligation upon obligation work"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.324-354.

____

📝read the article

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on the basis this article has been written, with more developments, technical references and hyperlinks

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published

📚see the general presentation of the series "Régulations & Compliance" in which this book is published

____

► English Summary of this contribution: The demonstration of the part played by Will in the Compliance Obligation incumbent on companies is based on the distinction and articulation between the Regulatory Legal Obligation and the spontaneous Obligation of companies, in the use that companies make of their will to implement their Regulatory Legal Obligation and the use that they make of it to produce even new ambitions. This is why the demonstration is carried out in 3 stages.

The first part of the demonstration consists in finding the part played by the free will of companies in their Compliance Obligation by putting an end to two confusions: the first, which, within the Contract and Tort Law itself but also within Compliance Law, splits up and confuses "free will" and "consent", which would no longer require freely expressed acceptance; the second, which, specific to Compliance Law, confuses "Compliance" and "conformity", reducing the former to mechanical obedience, which would exclude any free will.

Having clarified this, the rest of this study focuses on the 2 ways in which a company subject to a Compliance Obligation by regulations expresses a part of its free will, which the study expresses in this proposed adage: Obligation upon Obligation is valid, since the regulatory legal obligation to which the company responds by the obedience owed by all those subject to the Law may be superimposed by its free will, which will then oblige it.

The first case of Obligation upon Obligation, studied in a second part, concerns the means by which the Regulatory Legal Compliance Obligation is implemented, the company subject to the Monumental Goals set by the Law remaining free to choose the means by which it will contribute to achieving them. Its free will will thus be exercised over the choice and implementation of the means. This can take two legal forms: contracts on the one hand and "commitments" on the other.

Thirdly, the second case of Obligation upon Obligation, which is more radical, is that in which, in addition to Compliance's regulatory legal Obligation, the company draws on its free will to repeat the terms of its regulatory legal Obligation (because it is prohibited from contradicting it), a repetition which can be far-reaching, because the legal nature (and therefore the legal regime) is changed. The judgment handed down by the The Hague Court of Appeal on 12 November 2024, in the case law Shell, illustrates this. What is more, the free will of the company can play its part in the Compliance Obligation by increasing the Compliance Obligation. This is where the alliance is strongest. The interpretation of the specific obligations that result must remain that of the Monumental Goals in a teleological application that gives coherence to the whole.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance, Vigilance et Responsabilité civile : mettre en ordre et raison garder" (Compliance, Vigilance and Civil Liability: put in Order and keep the sense of Reason), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Lefebvre-Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.635-659.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on which this article is based, with additional developments, technical references and hyperlinks

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published

📚see the general presentation of the series "Régulations & Compliance" in which this book is published

____

► English summary of this article: The descriptions of the Liability incurred by large companies as a result of their compliance obligations are very diverse, even contradictory, going beyond the wishes that may be expressed as to what this liability should be. The first part of this study therefore sets out the various liabilities incurred by companies, which differ in the conditions under which they are implemented and in their scope, so as not to confuse them.

Indeed, as the various laws establish specific legal compliance obligations, they give rise to liabilities of varying conditions and scope, and it is not possible to avail of the regime of one in a situation that falls within the scope of another. It is therefore necessary to review the various bodies of compliance legislation, the GDPR, the ALM-FT regulations, the French so-called Sapin 2 law, the French so-called Vigilance law , the European IA Act , the European European DGA Act, etc., to recall the inflexion that each of these bodies of legislation has made to the liability rules applied to the companies subject to them. Nevertheless, the unicity of the Compliance Obligation, overcoming this necessary diversity of situations, regulations and liability regimes,  can provide grouping lines to indicate beyond this diversity the extent of the liability incurred by companies.

Once this classification has been made, the second part of the study develops the observation that none of this can create any principle of general liability on large companies in terms of compliance, and in particular not in terms of vigilance. It is not possible to deduce a general principle of specific obligations of liability or specific obligations to reparation, for example in the area of vigilance, as the texts creating specific vigilance obligation refer to the conditions of commun Tort Law (proof damage and causality), and International Public Law does not have the force to generate a general principle binding companies in this respect.

The third part stresses that it is nevertheless always possible to invoke Tort Law, and companies cannot claim to escape this. This may involve contractual liability, a situation  becoming increasingly frequent as companies contractualise their legal compliance obligations, reproducing them but also modifying them, and as Vigilance duty is an obligation that goes beyond the specific situations covered by the regulations. 

But it is essential, and this is the subject of the fourth part, not to make companies pure and simple guarantors of the state of the world, present and future. Indeed, if we were to transform sectoral compliances into illustrations of what would then be a new general principle, but one that applied only to them, they would consequently exercise the other side of this coin, namely power over others.

________

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter en vidéo MAFR Surplomb

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, Audition par le collège thématique "RSE" de l'Observatoire des litiges judiciaires de la Cour de cassation, " Points de contact entre le Droit de la Compliance et la RSE", Cour de cassation, 2 octobre 2025.

____

► Résumé de la présentation : La présentation dure une demie-heure. Elle est construite en deux temps, tout d'abord une présentation générale sur les "points de contact entre Droit de la compliance et RSE", en ce qu'ils dépendent de la conception que l'on a en pratique du Droit de la compliance, puis, dans la mesure où cette perspective intéresse plus particulièrement le collège thématique, un approfondissement sur les conséquences processuelles qu'il convient d'en tirer.

PREALABLE. DISTINGUER NETTEMENT LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE DE LA RSE, SEULE VOIE POUR LES ARTICULER

1. ne pas confondre la morale, source d'inspiration du Droit, et le Droit. 

Le Droit a des sources multiples, économiques, sociales, morales et religieuses. Les impératifs moraux inspirent le Droit, guident ceux qui adoptent des règles juridiques, guident les comportements. Mais ce sont deux ordres différents. Kelsen a construit sa "théorie pure" du Droit pour protéger le système juridique afin qu'il ne soit qu'inspiré par des valeurs qui sont dans une Norme fondamentale hors du système juridique. Ce que l'on appelle RSE est une norme qui inspire de nombreux blocs de compliance, par exemple Sapin 2, la loi Vigilance, la CSRD, la CS3D, etc. mais, de la même façon que la responsabilité juridique ne transforme pas le Deutéronome en Droit, ces textes ne transforment pas la RSE en Droit. Le Droit demeure autonome, n'est pas l'agent d'efficacité de l'éthique, qui trouverait enfin la puissance du Droit à son service.

De la même façon que le Droit économique n'est pas la façon dont des "lois économiques" trouvent une plus grande efficacité. Cela serait une erreur de pénétration entre deux ordres, et une vassalisation pour le Droit qui deviendrait l'agent d'effectivité d'une norme qui lui est hétéronome. Les économistes ne veulent pourtant au bénéfice de ce qui serait la loi économique. Carl Schmitt le voulait au bénéfice de ce qui serait la loi politique. Il est impératif dans un Etat de Droit que le Droit garde son autonomie par rapport à l'économie, à la politique et à l'éthique (ESG, RSE).

2. la loi peut, pour des motifs moraux, imposer à l'entreprise des obligations juridiques légales

Le Droit l'a toujours fait.

3. la responsabilité morale et la responsabilité juridique sont distinctes : la première n'entraîne pas ipso facto la seconde

4 l'entreprise peut par sa volonté s'imposer des obligations qui expriment des choix moraux, dès l'instant qu'ils ne contredisent pas la loi : elle juridicise sa responsabilité morale, les deux obligations se superposant

🔴mafr, 📝"Obligation sur obligation vaut", 2025

I. CE QU'EST EN PRATIQUE LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE, BATI SUR L'OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE A LAQUELLE L'ENTREPRISE EST ASSUJETTIE 

1. définition faible et définition forte de la compliance : ne pas réduire le Droit à une peau de chagrin, aider par sa "juridictionnalisation" à ce que la branche naissante du Droit de la compliance grandisse dans sa conception européenne

🔴 mafr  (dir.),📕  Pour une Europe de la Compliance, 2019

🔴 mafr  (dir.),📕  Les buts monumentaux de la compliance, 2022

🔴 mafr  (dir.),📕  L'obligation de compliance , 2025

2. le rôle central du juge dans le droit européen de la compliance, en construction

🔴 mafr  (dir.),📕  La juridictionnalisation de la compliance , 2024

3. l'obligation de vigilance, pointe avancée de l'obligation de compliance, 

🔴mafr, 📝La vigilance, pointe avancée et part totale de l'obligation de compliance, 2025

II. POINTS DE CONTACT ENTRE L'OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE DES ENTREPRISES CRUCIALES ET LA RESPONSABILITE SOCIETALE DES ENTREPRISES 

1. définition de l'obligation de compliance à laquelle l'entreprise cruciale est assujettie

🔴mafr, 📝Obligation de compliance : construire une structure de compliance produisant des effets crédibles au regard des Buts Monumentaux visés par le législateur, 2025 

2. "Obligation sur obligation vaut"

🔴mafr, 📝"Obligation sur obligation vaut", 2025

3. cumul possible des deux natures, engagement de droit, engagement de fait : régime juridique (ex. La Haye, 12 nov. 2024, Shell)

🔴mafr, 📝A quoi engagent les engagements, 2025

4. ll n'existe pas d'obligation juridique générale de veiller sur autrui ; il existe des obligations spéciales, une obligation spéciale sur l'entreprise maîtresse de sa chaine de valeur et, par exemple un souci éthique que l'entreprise, par sa volonté, peut juridiciser

🔴mafr, 📝Compliance, vigilance et responsabilité civile : mettre en ordre et raison garder, 2025

III. PERSPECTIVE PROCESSUELLES DES POINTS DE CONTACT ENTRE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE ET RSE 

1. Nature transitivement systémique du contentieux de la compliance

🔴mafr, 📝Les causes systémiques portées devant le juge, 2021

🔴mafr,  📝Droit de la compliance et contentieux systémique, 2025

🔴mafr (dir.), 📕 Contentieux systémique émergent, 2025

2. Double primauté : trouver des solutions ; avoir souci du futur

🔴🧮Dans l’espace de justice, les pratiques juridictionnelles au service du futur, 2024

🔴Th. Goujon-Bethan, 📝Les enjeux présents et à venir de l'articulation des principes de procédure civile et commerciale avec la logique de compliance, 2025

3. Régression de la méthode punitive, efficacité du principe contradictoire et de l'accusatoire comme mode d'obtention des informations, engagements et "programmes"

🔴F. Ancel, 📝Devoir de vigilance et litiges commerciaux : une compétence à partager ?, 2025

🔴M. Chapuis, 📝Le juge de l'amiable et la compliance, 2025

🔴Th. Goujon-Bethan, 📝Les enjeux présents et à venir de l'articulation des principes de procédure civile et commerciale avec la logique de compliance, 2025

4. Préserver les droits de la défense et la sagesse probatoire dont les pavés sont attaqués dans le paradis de la RSE

🔴mafr, 📝Le juge, l'obligation de compliance et l'entreprise. Le système probatoire de la Compliance, 2023

🔴 mafr et M. Boissavy (dir.),📕 Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquêtes internes, CJIP, CRPC, 2024 

🔴J.-Ch. Roda, 📝La preuve de la bonne exécution de la vigilance au regard du système probatoire de compliance,2025

____

► Full Reference: L. d'Avout, "Compliance et conflits de lois. Le droit international de la vigilance-conformité à partir de quelques applications récentes sur le continent européen" ("Compliance and conflict of laws. International Law of Vigilance-Conformity, based on recent applications in Europe"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.173-196.

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► English Summary of this Article (done par the Author) : In the absence of constraints derived from the real international law, vigilance-compliance laws themselves determine their scope of application in space. They do so generously, to the extent that they often converge on the same operators and 'overlap' on the world stage. The result is a hybridisation of the law applicable to the definition of Compliance Obligations; a law possibly written "with four hands" or more, which is not always harmonious and which exposes unilateral legislators to occasional retouching their work and their applied regulations.

________

► Full Reference : E. Netter, "Les technologies de conformité pour satisfaire les exigences du droit de la compliance. Exemple du numérique" (Conformity technologies to meet the requirements of Compliance Caw. Digital example), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.355-367.

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'obligation de Compliance, in which this contribution is published.

____

► English summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance) :The author distinguishes between Compliance, which refers to Monumental Goals, and conformity, which are the concrete means that the company uses to tend towards them, through processes, check-lists in the monitoring of which the operator is accountable (art. 5.2. GRPD). Technology enables the operator to meet this requirement, as the changing nature of technology fits in well with the very general nature of the goals pursued, which leave plenty of room for businesses and public authorities to produce soft law.

The contribution focuses firstly on existing technologies. Through Compliance, Law can prohibit a technology or restrict its use because it runs counter to the goal pursued, for example the technology of fully automated decisions producing legal effects on individuals. Because it is a perilous exercise to dictate by law what is good and what is bad in this area, the method is rather one of explicability, i.e. control through knowledge by others.

Regulators are nevertheless developing numerous requirements stemming from the Monumental Goals of Compliance. Operators must update their technology or abandon obsolete technology in the light of new risks or to enable effective competition that does not lock users into a closed system. But technological power must not become too intrusive, as the privacy and freedom of the individuals concerned must be respected, which leads to the principles of necessity and proportionality.

The author stresses that operators must comply with the regulations by using certain technologies if these technologies are available, or even to counteract them if they are contrary to the goals of the regulations, but this obligation of conformity is applied only if these technologies are available. The notion of "available technology" therefore becomes the criterion of the obligation, which means that its content varies with circumstances and time, particularly in the area of cybersecurity.

In the second part of this contribution, the author examines technologies that are only potential, those that Law, and in particular the courts, might require companies to invent in order to fulfill their conformity obligation. This is quite understandable when we are talking about technologies that are in the making, but which will come to fruition, for example in the area of personal data transfer to satisfy the right to portability (GRPD), or where companies must be encouraged to develop technologies that are of less immediate benefit to them, or in the area of secure payment to ensure strong authentication (SPD 2).

This is more difficult for technologies whose feasibility is not even certain, such as online age verification or the interoperability of secure messaging systems, two requirements which appear to be technologically contradictory in their terms, and which therefore still come under the heading of "imaginary technology". But Compliance is putting so much pressure on companies, particularly digital technology companies, that considerable investment is required to achieve it.

The author concludes that this is the very ambition of Compliance and that the future will show how successful it will be. 

____

🦉This article is available in full texte for persons following Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche teaching.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Concevoir l'Obligation de Compliance : faire usage de sa position pour participer à la réalisation des Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance" ("Conceiving the Compliance Obligation: Using its Position to take part in achieving the Compliance Monumental Goals"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, "Régulations & Compliance" Serie, 2025, pp.3-44.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on the basis this contribution has been built, with  more developments, technical references and hyperlinks. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published 

____

► English summary of this contribution: Rather than getting bogged down in definitional disputes, given that Compliance Law is itself a incipient branch of Law, the idea of this contribution is to take as a starting point the different regimes of so many different compliance obligations to which laws and regulations subject large companies: sometimes they must apply them to the letter and sometimes they are only penalised in the event of fault or negligence. This brings us back to the distinction between obligations of result and obligations of means.

Although it might be risky to transpose the expression and regime of contractual obligations to legal obligations, starting from this observation in the Compliance Evidentiary System of a plurality of obligations of means and of result, depending on whether we are dealing with this or that technical compliance obligation, we must first classify them. It would appear that this plurality does not constitute a definitive obstacle to the creation of a single definition of the Compliance Obligation. On the contrary, it makes it possible to clarify the situation, to trace the paths through what is so often described as a legal jumble, an unmanageable mass of regulations.

Indeed, insofar as the company obliged under Compliance Law participates in the achievement of the Monumental Goals on which this branch of Law is normatively based, a legal obligation which may be relayed by contract or even by ethics, it can only be an obligation of means, by virtue of this very teleological nature and the scale of the goals targeted, for example the happy outcome of the climate crisis which is beginning or the desired effective equality between human beings. This established principle leaves room for the fact that the behaviour required is marked out by processes put in place by structured tools, most often legally described, for example the establishment of a vigilance plan or regularly organised training courses (effectiveness), are obligations of result, while the positive effects produced by this plan or these training courses (efficacy) are obligations of means. This is even more the case when the aim is to transform the system as a whole, i.e. to ensure that the system is solidly based, that there is a culture of equality, and that everyone respects everyone else - all of which come under the heading of efficiency.

The Compliance Obligation thus appears unified because, gradually, and whatever the various compliance obligations in question, their intensity or their sector, its structural process prerequisites are first and foremost structures to be established which the Law, through the Judge in particular, will require to be put in place but will not require anything more, whereas striving towards the achievement of the aforementioned Monumental Goals will be an obligation of means, which may seem lighter, but corresponds to an immeasurable ambition, linked with these Goals. Moreover, because these structures (warning platforms, training, audits, contracts and clauses, etc.) only have meaning in order to produce effects and behaviour leading to changes converging towards the Monumental Goals, it is the obligations of means that are most important and not the obligations of result. The judge must also take this into account.

Finally, the Compliance Obligation, which therefore consists of this interweaving of multiple compliance obligations of result and means of using the Entreprise's position, ultimately aims at system efficiency, in Europe at system civilisation, for which companies must show not so much that they have followed the processes correctly (result) but that this has produced effects that converge with the Goals sought by the legislator (effects produced according to a credible trajectory). This is how a crucial economic operator, responsible Ex Ante, should organise itself and behave.

________

► Full reference : Th. Goujon-Bethan, "Les enjeux présents à venir de l’articulation des principes de procédure civile et commerciale avec la logique de compliance (Current and future challenges for articulating civil and commercial procedural principles with Compliance Logic)", in  M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.693-719.

____

📕Read a general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published.

____

► Summary of this article (by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC): The author shows that the French Code of Civil Procedure, because it is exceptionally well designed and managed, can respond to the scale of transformation brought about by Compliance Law.

Compliance Law is normatively anchored in its Monumental Goals: these are brought as such before the judge in 'Systemic Cases'.

However, the French Code of Civil Procedure distinguishes between litigation and conflict, as demonstrated by the work of the academic authors of the Code, who were very famous legal scholars. Indeed, in a "Systemic Case" such as Compliance Law, which necessarily takes precedence (climate, protection of internet users, effective equality of human beings, sustainability of banking systems, etc.), it is the parties who are in dispute, while the conflict encompasses the systems themselves and other entities.
The procedure must incorporate not only the dispute but also the conflict. This means, in particular, that we must deal not only with the dispute, but also with the conflict, which does not necessarily end with the dispute and does not find the same solutions as those sought by the dispute. It is particularly in this latter perspective, essentially in a "Systemic Compliance Case" procedure, that the techniques of mediation, amicus curiae, with a judge who takes an ex ante position, etc., are required. They are available through legal dispositions of this French Code of Civil Procedure: judges who understand what "Systemic Compliance Cases" are need only apply them.

____

🦉this  article is available in full text for people who follow the professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's teaching 

________

► Full Reference: B. Deffains, "La dette comme fondement de l'obligation de compliance" ("From the Debt to the Compliance Obligation"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, "Régulations & Compliance" Serie, 2025, pp.67-82.

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this contribution is published

____

► Summary of this contribution  (done by the Journal  of Regulation  & Compliance):  The contribution builds on the definition of Compliance in that it requires large companies to contribute to the achievement of Monumental Goals, including the preservation of human rights and systems, e.g. climate system.  

This requirement is confronted with the notion of Debt as it results today from classic and new works available in economic science. In fact, in the primitive economy, debt refers not only to exchanges, but also to an ethical and social obligation leading back to the collective. The Economic Analysis of Law has highlighted this situation, where some of the entities involved in a situation benefit from positive externalities, or endure negative externalities on their own, thus creating a situation of debt: this generates an obligation to correct market failure through an obligation to manage risks, as expressed by Compliance Obligation. This implies that economic calculation can be used to quantify this debt, leading to new proposals for biodiversity accounting.

The author then highlights the recognition of Debt as the source of an Compliance Obligation. This can be expressed through the classical notion of natural obligation, which can be traced back to the French Civil Code, or through more solidarist or political conceptions of Law, linked to moral responsibility, with the overall moral equilibrium referring to civic duty, superimposed on the accounting equilibrium. The political dimension is very much present, as shown by Grotius and Kant, then Bourgeois (solidarism), Rawls and Sen (social justice), who link the deep commitment of each individual with the group. This sheds light on the essential role played by the State and public institutions in formalising and enforcing the Compliance Obligation, not only to ensure its effectiveness, but also to make everyone aware of its fairness dimension.

____

🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses

________

► Full Reference: B. Frydman & A. Briegleb, "L'obligation de compliance en Droit global ("Compliance Obligation in Global Law)", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Éditions Lefebvre - Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.299-311.

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this contribution is published 

____

► English summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC): The authors stress that the Contracts Law and Tort Law are essential in Compliance Law, particularly in its global legal perspective, since it goes beyond the legal systems of States and develops new normativities, at the level of each company, but also allows a new expression of public power through the Monumental Goals that Compliance Law claims to achieve globally. The weaker the States, the greater the delegation to the first level is operating.

In concrete terms, the authors examine a series of situations in which various organisations use compliance techniques to appropriate global power over things or people, which has the effect, and sometimes the purpose, of reducing the freedoms of people controlled in this way. Thus CSR, which was initially non-binding, is now the source of binding obligations, and the moral obligation expressed in codes of conduct can become a civil obligation, as the Supreme Court of California decided in 2002 in the Nike case. 

In addition, "Comply or Explain" clauses are now commonplace, allowing the person subject to the legislation not to comply if they can justify it, which is the basis of the many information reports that companies are now required to publish.

Then, returning to the issue of liability, particularly in the digital environment, the article stresses the importance of 'conditional immunity from liability', taking the view from the European DSA that certain operators, such as hosting providers, are not liable unless they take on obligations, such as monitoring functions on contents published.

Finally, with regard to the duty of vigilance, it tends for the first time to align the scope of "responsibility" with the scope of "power", moral responsibility thus becoming legal responsibility, which would be like a new responsibility for others.

The result of all this is an "obligation to regulate others".

________

🦉This article is available for people who follow the Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche teaching

► Full Reference: A.-C. Rouaud, "L’intensité de l’obligation de vigilance selon les secteurs : le cas des opérateurs financiers" (The intensity of the obligation of vigilance depending on the sector: the case of financial operators), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) an Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.539-550.

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this contribution is published

____

► English summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : The author develops the case of financial operators and shows that if they are subject to very heavy obligations of vigilance, it is above all because of the systemic risks of the markets, obligations which are consubstantial with their activities, because these operators are often in charge of market infrastructures or operating services, which make them all belong to the category of regulated professions.

Despite this uniqueness, the obligation of vigilance has many facets, ranging from policing and customer surveillance to warning and protection, which can be very limited, as the fight against money laundering aims to protect the system (kyc).

In addition, this obligation to exercise vigilance serves different goals, which explains the diversity of sanctions, because the intensity of the obligation also varies. The fight against systemic risk is certainly a common goal, but there are also concerns about protecting specific categories, such as investors (from a more European perspective).

However, the general interest is now being renewed, as market protection is coupled with a concern for Sustainability. This is reflected in the variability of sanctions, ranging from disciplinary sanctions, handled by the financial markets regulatory bodies, to the obligation to put in place compliance programmes against which breaches are sanctioned per se. Private enforcement is developing in tandem with public enforcement, with a transformation of the litigation risk for companies, which is highly sensitive to extraterritoriality and the scope of soft law.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the VideoNews  MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Law & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, coll."Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2025, 816 p.

____

📘 At the same time, a book in English, Compliance Obligation, is published in the collection copublished by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the Éditions Bruylant.

____

📚This volume is one of a series of books devoted to Compliance in the series edited by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche.

___

► General presentation of this book: Compliance is sometimes presented as something that cannot be avoided, which is tantamount to seeing it as the legal obligation par excellence, Criminal Law being its most appropriate mode of expression. It is sometimes presented as something that the company does out of ethical concern, self-regulation which is the opposite of legal obligation. For the moment, therefore, there is no single vision of the Compliance Obligation. This is all the less the case because of the multitude of texts, themselves constantly evolving and changing, which inject such a wide range of compliance obligations that we give up trying to establish any unity, thinking that, on a case-by-case basis, we will define a regime and a legal constraint of greater or lesser strength, aimed at one subject or debtor or another, for the benefit of one or other.

This lack of unity, due to the absence of a definition of the Compliance Obligation, makes the application of the texts difficult to foresee and therefore makes the Judge fearful, even though he/she is going to take on more and more importance.

This book asks the practical questions: What is Compliance obliging? Who is obliged to comply? and How far are we obliged to comply? and provides answers, Compliance practices, constraints and innovations will be better mastered and anticipated by all those they affect: companies, stakeholders, technicians, lawyers, consultants, institutions and courts.

____

🏗️general construction of this Book: The book opens with a double Introduction.  The first, which is freely accessible, consists of a summary of the book, while the second, which is substantial, deals with the unified conception that we can, and indeed should, have, of the "Compliance Obligation", without losing the concrete and active character that characterises this branch of law.

The first Part of the book aims to define the Compliance Obligation. To this end, Chapter I deals with the Nature of this obligation. Chapter II deals with the Spaces of the Compliance Obligation.

The Part II aims to articulate the Compliance Obligation with other branches of Law. 

The Part III of the book looks at the way in which the possibility of obliging and the means of obliging are provided.  To this end, Chapter I deals with the Convergence of the Sources of the Compliance Obligation. Chapter II considers International Arbitration as a reinforcement of the Compliance Obligation. To this end, Chapter I deals with the Convergence of the Sources of the Compliance Obligation. Chapter II considers International Arbitration as a reinforcement of the Compliance Obligation. 

The last Part of the book is devoted to Vigilance, the leading edge of the Compliance Obligation. Chapter I is devoted to a study of the various sectors, and analyses the Intensities of the Vigilance Obligation. Chapter II deals with the Variations in Tension generated by the Vigilance Obligation. Finally, Chapter III deals with the New Modalities of the Compliance Obligation, highlighted by the Vigilance Imperative.

____

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

ANCRER LES OBLIGATIONS DE COMPLIANCE SI DIVERSES  

 DANS LEUR NATURE, LEURS REGIMES ET LEUR FORCE 

POUR DEGAGER  L'UNITE DE L'OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE

LA RENDANT COMPREHENSIBLE ET PRATIQUABLE 

(ANCHOR COMPLIANCE OBLIGATIONS, SO DIVERSE

 IN THEIR NATURE, THEIR REGIMES AND THEIR FORCE,

TO BRING OUT THE UNITY OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION

MAKING IT COMPREHENSIBLE AND PRACTICABLE)

♦️ Obligation de Compliance : construire une structure de compliance produisant des effets crédibles au regard des Buts Monumentaux visés par le Législateur (Compliance Obligation: building a compliance structure that produces credible results with regard to the Monumental Goals targeted by the Legislator), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

TITRE I.

CERNER L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE 

(IDENTIFYING THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

CHAPITRE I : LA NATURE DE L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE (THE NATURE OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

Section 1 ♦️ La volonté, le cœur et le calcul, les trois traits cernant l'Obligation de Compliance  (Will, Heart and Calculation, the three traits encercling the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 2 ♦️ De la dette à l’obligation de compliance (From the Debt to the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Bruno Deffains

Section 3 ♦️ Obligation de Compliance et droits humains (Compliance Obligation and Human Rights), by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Racine

Section 4 ♦️ L'Obligation de Compliance et les mutations de la souveraineté et de la citoyenneté (Compliance Obligation and changes in Sovereignty and Citizenship), by 🕴️René Sève

Section 5 ♦️ La définition de l''obligation de compliance confrontée au droit de la cybersécurité (The definition of the Compliance Obligation in Cybersecurity Law) by🕴️Michel Séjean

CHAPITRE II : LES ESPACES DE L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE (SPACES OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

Section 1 ♦️ Entités industrielles et Obligation de compliance (Industrial entities and Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Etienne Maclouf

Section 2 ♦️ L'Obligation de Compliance dans les chaînes de valeur (The Compliance Obligation in Value Chains), by 🕴️Lucien Rapp

Section 3 ♦️ Compliance et conflits de lois. Le droit international de la vigilance-conformité à partir de quelques applications récentes sur le continent européen (Compliance and conflict of laws. International Law of Vigilance-Conformity, based on recent applications in Europe), by 🕴️Louis d'Avout 

TITRE II.

ARTICULER L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE AVEC DES BRANCHES DU DROIT

(ARTICULATING THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION WITH BRANCHES OF LAW)

Section 2 ♦️ Droit fiscal et obligation de compliance (Tax Law and Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Daniel Gutmann

Section 3 ♦️ Le droit processuel, prototype de l'Obligation de Compliance (General Procedural Law, prototype of the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 4 ♦️ Le droit des sociétés et des marchés financiers face à l'Obligation de Compliance (Corporate and Financial Markets Law facing the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Anne-Valérie Le Fur

Section 5 ♦️ Le rapport entre le Droit de la responsabilité civile et l'Obligation de Compliance (The link between Tort Law and Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Jean-Sébastien Borghetti

Section 6 ♦️ Dimensions environnementales et climatiques de l'Obligation de Compliance (Environmental and Climatic Dimensions of the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Marta Torre-Schaub

Section 7 ♦️ Droit de la concurrence et Droit de la Compliance (Competition Law and Compliance Law), by 🕴️Jean-Christophe Roda

Section 8 ♦️ L'Obligation de Compliance en Droit global (The Compliance Obligation in Global Law), by 🕴️Benoît Frydman & 🕴️Alice Briegleb

Section 9 ♦️ Les juges du droit des entreprises en difficulté et les obligations de compliance (Judges of Insolvency Law and Compliance Obligations), by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Barbièri

TITRE III.

COMPLIANCE : DONNER ET SE DONNER LES MOYENS D’OBLIGER

(COMPLIANCE : GIVE AND TAKE THE MEANS TO OBLIGE)

CHAPITRE I : LA CONVERGENCE DES SOURCES (CONVERGENCE OF SOURCES)

Section 1 ♦️ Obligation sur obligation vaut (Compliance Obligation on Obligation works), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

Section 2 ♦️ Les technologies disponibles, prescrites ou proscrites pour satisfaire Compliance et Vigilance (Technologies available, prescribed or prohibited to meet Compliance and Vigilance requirements), by 🕴️Emmanuel Netter

Section 3 ♦️ Contrainte légale et stratégie des entreprises en matière de Compliance (Legal Constraint and Company Strategies in Compliance matters), by 🕴️Jean-Philippe Denis & Nathalie Fabbe-Costes

Section 4 ♦️ La loi, source de l’Obligation de Compliance (The Law, source of the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Blanc

Section 5 ♦️ Opposition et convergence des systèmes juridiques américains et européens dans les règles et cultures de compliance (Opposition and Convergence of American and European Legal Systems in Compliance Rules and Cultures), by 🕴️Raphaël Gauvain & 🕴️Blanche Balian

Section 6 ♦️ Ce à quoi les engagements engagent qu'est un engagement (What a ), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

CHAPITRE II : L’ARBITRAGE INTERNATIONAL EN RENFORT DE L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE (INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN SUPPORT OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

Section 1 ♦️ Comment l'arbitrage international peut être un renfort de l'Obligation de Compliance (How International Arbitration can reinforce the Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Laurent Aynès

Section 2 ♦️ La considération par l'Arbitrage de l'Obligation de Compliance pour une place d'arbitrage durable (Arbitration' consideration of Compliance Obligation for a Sustainable Arbitration Place),  by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche 

Section 3 ♦️ L’usage de l’arbitrage international pour renforcer l’obligation de Compliance : l’exemple du secteur de la construction (The use of International Arbitration to reinforce the Compliance Obligation: the example of the construction sector), by 🕴️Christophe Lapp

Section 4 ♦️ L’arbitre, juge, superviseur, accompagnateur  ? (The Arbitrator, Judge, Supervisor, Support) , by 🕴️Jean-Baptiste Racine

TITRE IV.

LA VIGILANCE, POINTE AVANCÉE DE L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE

(VIGILANCE, SPEARHEAD OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

Section 1 ♦️ La Vigilance, pointe avancée et part totale de l'Obligation de Compliance (....), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

CHAPITRE I : LES INTENSITÉS DE L’OBLIGATION DE VIGILANCE, POINTE AVANCÉE DU SYSTÈME DE COMPLIANCE (INTENSITIES OF THE VIGILANCE OBLIGATION, SPEARHEAD OF THE COMPLIANCE SYSTEM)

Section 2 ♦️ L’intensité de l’Obligation de Vigilance selon les secteurs : le cas des opérateurs financiers (Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Financial Operators), by 🕴️Anne-Claire Rouaud

Section 3 ♦️ L’intensité de l’Obligation de Vigilance selon les secteurs : le cas des opérateurs bancaires et d’assurance (Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Banking and Insurance Operators), by 🕴️Mathieu Françon

Section 4 ♦️ L’intensité de l’obligation de vigilance selon les secteurs : le cas des opérateurs numériques (Intensity of the Vigilance Obligation by Sectors: the case of Digital Operators), by 🕴️Grégoire Loiseau

Section 5 ♦️ L’Obligation de vigilance des opérateurs énergétiques (The Vigilance obligation of Energy Operators), by 🕴️Marie Lamoureux

Section 2 ♦️ Transformation de la gouvernance et obligation de Vigilance (Transformation of Governance and Vigilance Obligation), by 🕴️Véronique Magniermag

CHAPITRE II : LES DISPUTES AUTOUR DE L'OBLIGATION DE VIGILANCE, POINTE AVANCÉE DU SYSTÈME DE COMPLIANCE, DANS SON RAPPORT AVEC LA RESPONSABILITÉ

Section 1 ♦️ Le rapport entre le droit de la responsabilité civile et l'obligation de compliance, by 🕴️Jean-Sébastien Borghetti

Section 2 ♦️ Repenser le concept de responsabilité civile à l’aune du devoir de vigilance, pointe avancée de la compliance (Rethinking the Concept of Civil Liability in the light of the Duty of Vigilance, Spearhead of Compliance), by 🕴️Mustapha Mekki

Section 3 ♦️ Tensions et contradictions entre les instruments relatifs à la vigilance raisonnable des entreprises, by 🕴️Laurence Dubin

Section 4 ♦️ Compliance, Vigilance et Responsabilité civile : mettre en ordre et raison garde (Compliance, Vigilance  and Civil Liability: put in order and keep the Reason), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

CHAPITRE III : LES MODALITÉS NOUVELLES DE L'OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE, MISES EN LUMIÈRE PAR L'IMPÉRATIF DE VIGILANCE (NEW MODALITIES OF THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION, HIGHLIGHTED BY THE VIGILANCE IMPERATIVE)

Section 1 ♦️ Clauses et contrats, modalités de l’obligation de vigilance (Clauses and Contracts, terms and conditions of implementation of the Vigilance Obligation), by 🕴️Gilles J. Martin

Section 2 ♦️ La preuve de la bonne exécution de la Vigilance au regard du système probatoire de Compliance (Proof that Vigilance has been properly carried out with regard to the Compliance Evidence System), by 🕴️Jean-Christophe Roda

TITRE V.

LE JUGE ET L'OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE

(THE JUDGE AND THE COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION)

Section 1 Section 1 ♦️ Devoir de vigilance et litiges commerciaux : une compétence à partager ?, par 🕴️François Ancel

Section 2 ♦️ Les enjeux présents à venir de l’articulation des principes de procédure civile et commerciale avec la logique de compliance (Present and Future Challenges of Articulating Principles of Civil and Commercial Procedure with the Logic of Compliance), by 🕴️Thibault Goujon-Bethan

Section 3 ♦️ Le juge de l’amiable et la compliance (The amicable settlement judge and compliance), by 🕴️Malik Chapuis

Section 4 ♦️ Le Juge requis pour une Obligation de Compliance effective (The Judge required for an Effective Compliance Obligation), by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

L’OBLIGATION DE COMPLIANCE : VISION D’ENSEMBLE

(COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION : OVERVIEW)

♦️ L'obligation de compliance, charge portée par les entreprises systémiques donnant vie au Droit de la Compliance. - lignes de force de l'ouvrage (The Compliance Obligation, a burden borne by Systemic Companies giving life to Compliance Law -  key points of the book (free access) by 🕴️Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

________

► Full Reference: J.-S. Borghetti, "Le rapport entre le Droit de la responsabilité civile et l'Obligation de Compliance" (The Relation between Tort Law and Compliance Obligation), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.589-598.

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► English Summary of this Article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : The Author points out that in order to establish civil liability, it is first necessary to find fault, i.e. a deviation from an obligation, which will trigger a secondary obligation, that of reparation. But it can also be argued that it is from liability that this primary obligation arises, civil liability then revealing an obligation which existed only implicitly. That establishes a two-way relationship between liability and obligation. The Compliance Obligation illustrates this, in particular through the Obligation of Vigilance conceived by the French law of 2017.

The author therefore devotes the first part of his contribution to civil liability as a result of an Compliance Obligation, especially the Obligation of Vigilance. issued of the French law of 2017. After discussing whether the constraints generated by compliance should be classified as 'obligations', since there is no creditor, which therefore opens the way to liability in tort, he examines the conditions for incurring such liability, which are difficult, particularly with regard to the burden of proof and the demonstration of the causal link. The requirement concerning the latter may evolve in French law towards the admission of proportional causality, as is now accepted in certain cases in German case law.

In the second part of his contribution, the author deals with the hypothesis of civil liability as an indicator of a Compliance Obligation. He points out that the claims made, particularly in the cases of TotalOuganda  (France) and Milieudefensie v. Shell (Netherlands) seek to obtain from the judge a such "revelation".

The author considers that it is not possible to draw from the  French 2017 law which refers to article 1240 of the French Civil Code on the liability because this article is referred to only in order to organise the consequences of a breach of article L.225-102-4 of the French Commercial Code organising the Obligation of Vigilance (article 1240 being therefore under the secondary obligation described above) and not to feed what this article L.225-102-4 requires under the primary obligation (defined above). 

________

► Full Reference: D. Gutmann, "Droit fiscal et obligation de compliance" (Tax Law and Compliance Obligation), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.199-207.

____

► English summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): The author takes up the hypothesis of a Compliance Law defined by its Monumental Goals, the realisation of which is entrusted to "crucial operators" and confronts it with Tax Law. The link is particularly effective since these operators possess what governments need in this area: relevant Information.

Going further, Compliance Law can give rise to two types of obligations on the part of these operators, either towards others operators who need to be monitored, corrected or denounced, or towards themselves, when they need to make amends.

In the first part of this contribution, the author shows that Compliance Obligation reproduces the mechanism of a Tax Law which, for large companies, is embroiled in a process of increasing Globalisation. It enables Governments to aspire to the "Monumental Goals" of combating tax optimisation and impoverishing governments, victims of the erosion of the tax base, in the face of the strategies of companies that are more powerful than they are themselves, by using this very power of firms to turn it against them. Companies become the willing or de facto allies of governments, particularly when it comes to recovering tax debts, or assist them in their stated ambition to achieve social justice.  In this way, the State "manages" Tax Law by cooperating with companies.

In the second part, the author outlines the contours of this business Compliance Obligation, which is no longer simply a matter of paying tax. Beyond this financial obligation, it is more a question of mastering Information, particularly when multinational companies are subject to specific tax reporting obligations and are required to reveal their tax strategy, presumed to be transparent and coherent within the group : this legal presumption gives rise to obligations to seek information and ensure coherence, since a single tax strategy is not self-evident in a group.

The author emphasises that companies have accepted the principles governing these new compliance obligations and are tending to transform these obligations, particularly Transparency, into a communication strategy, in line with the ESG criteria that have been developed and a desire for fruitful relations with stakeholders. Therefore the tax relations developed by major companies are being extended not only to the tax authorities, but also to NGOs, by incorporating a strong ethical dimension. This is leading to new strategies, particularly in the area of Vigilance.

The author concludes: "A n’en pas douter, l’obligation de compliance existe bel et bien en matière fiscale." ("There is no doubt that the Compliance Obligation does exist in tax matters").

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'obligation de Compliance, in which this contribution is published

________

► Full Reference: J.-B. Racine, "L’arbitre, juge, superviseur, accompagnateur ?" (The arbitrator, judge, supervisor, coach?), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.489-502.

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► English Summary of this article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : From the outset, the author sets out what is at stake in these terms:  "Quel rôle peut ou pourrait jouer l’arbitre dans les dispositifs de compliance ? Selon le rôle qu’il est amené à jouer, il peut ou pourrait venir en renfort de l’obligation de compliance. Poser cette question, c’est poser la question des pouvoirs de l’arbitre et de son office. C’est aussi, d’une certaine manière, renvoyer à la notion même d’arbitrage." (What role can or could the arbitrator play in compliance systems? Depending on the role he/she is called upon to play, he/she can or could reinforce the compliance obligation. Asking this question raises the question of the powers of the arbitrator and his/her office. In a way, it also goes back to the very notion of arbitration). 

In practice, arbitrators deal with compliance issues in their office as judges. This is illustrated by disputes involving allegations of corruption, where the arbitrators' ruling obviously cannot give effect to a corrupt practice unless they violate themselves international public order. But in this, the arbitrator is only applying a legal standard, the main issue being then the question of evidence, with compliance tools often serving as indicators of the corruption itself. Leaving behind the strict legal source and coming to the standards issued by the ICC about the fight against corruption, we really enter into the "compliance obligation", in the strict sense, when a contract appears.

International business practices standards are emerging, not only in the area of probity but also in the protection of human rights, for which arbitrators can now act as guarantors. Arbitrators can do this, in particular, through the emerging litigation relating to vigilance obligation, either directly when vigilance plans are at issue,, even if a legal rule gives a specific competence to a State court (as the French 2017 law does) or if we imagine that a plan itself includes a system for recourse to arbitration, which would imply a change in culture, or if we consider that soft law is in the process of emerging from the practices of international trade laying down a duty of vigilance that arbitrators could take up.

In the second part of his contribution, the author takes a second, bolder approach, namely that of an arbitrator who understands Compliance Law in that he/she would be more than a Judge, i.e. he/she would do more than settle a dispute by applying the law.

This would be conceivable given the tendency to consider that the arbitrator could modify contracts and if example is taken from the technique of arbitration practised for concentration disputes in merger law. To give arbitration the required regulatory dimension, this third party would have to be able to exercise a supervisory function, which the notion of "dispute" hardly lends itself to, especially as an arbitrator is only set up to be a judge, and if he/she ceases to be one it is difficult for him/her to remain an arbitrator.... However, it is conceivable that in Ex Post the arbitrator could perform the monitoring function often required in Compliance Law. The technique of disputes boards is inspiring in this respect. The two fields, Arbitration and Compliance, are thus destined to move closer together, as the two traditional limits, arbitrability and litigation, are in the process of evolving so that they no longer stand in the way of such rapprochements.

The author can therefore conclude: "C’est aux différents acteurs de la compliance de penser à l’arbitrage, et à la souplesse, la plasticité et la liberté qu’il offre, pour éventuellement le configurer spécialement au service des buts de la compliance." (It is up to the various players in Compliance to think about Arbitration, and the flexibility, plasticity and freedom it offers, in order to configure it specifically to serve the goals of Compliance Law).

________

► Full Reference: M. Séjean, "La définition de l’obligation de compliance confrontée au droit de la cybersécurité (The definition of the Compliance Obligation in Cybersecurity Law)", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.109-117.

____

📕read the general presentation of the book, L'obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published.

____

► English Summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : The contribution compares the general definition given by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche with the specific nature of the world of cybersecurity, its legal organisation and the principles that govern it.

 Taking up all the elements of this general definition, according to which the Compliance Obligation consists in "building a compliance structure producing credible effects in the perspective of the Monumental Goals targeted by the Legislator", the author shows that beyond the specificities of cybersecurity rules,  this corresponds in practice and in each of the elements of this definition, confronted with the various elements that constitute what is required in terms of cybersecurity, to what is technically required of the entities and persons concerned in terms of cybersecurity, which is actually thought out in these terms.

________

► Référence complète : A.-V. Le Fur, "Le droit des sociétés et des marchés financiers face à l'Obligation de Compliance", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) et Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.235-258.

____

📕lire une présentation générale de l'ouvrage, L'Obligation de Compliance, dans lequel cet article est publié

____

► Résumé de l'article (fait par le Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : L'auteure montre que le Droit des sociétés et des marchés financiers est en train d'être transformé en profondeur par le Droit de la Compliance. Par une succession de textes un mouvement de fond a transformé ces deux branches du Droit, par ailleurs corrélées.

L'auteure situe la première perception de ce mouvement interne au Droit des sociétés dans la loi NRE, pour décrire ensuite les lois sur l'information des associés, des investisseurs et des parties prenantes. Elle a insiste sur la loi dite "Pacte", qui changea la conception même de ce qu'est une société au regard de ce qu'est une entreprise. Cela est indissociable des lois et des jurisprudences que l'on associe davantage au Droit de la Compliance, notamment la loi dite "Sapin 2" et la loi dite "Vigilance", les textes de directives poursuivant cette transformation si profonde.

________

🦉Cet article est accessible en texte intégral pour les personnes inscrites aux enseignements de la Professeure Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le droit processuel, prototype de l'Obligation de Compliance " ("General Procedural Law, prototype of Compliance Obligation"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance" 2025, pp. 209-233.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on the basis this contribution has been built, with  more developments, technical references and hyperlinks. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published 

____

► English summary of this contribution : At first glance, General Procedural Law seems to be the area the least concerned by the Compliance Obligation, because if the person is obliged by it, mainly large companies, it is precisely, thanks to this Ex Ante, in order to never to have to deal with proceedings, these path that leads to the Judge, that Ex Post figure that in return for the weight of the compliance obligation they have been promised they will never see: any prospect of proceedings would be seeming to signify the very failure of the Compliance Obligation (I).

But not only are the legal rules attached to the Procedure necessary because the Judge is involved, and increasingly so, in compliance mechanisms, but they are also rules of General Procedural Law and not a juxtaposition of civil procedure, criminal procedure, administrative procedure, etc., because the Compliance Obligation itself is not confined either to civil procedure or to criminal procedure, to administrative procedure, etc., which in practice gives primacy to what brings them all together: General Procedural Law (II).

In addition to what might be called the "negative" presence of General Procedural Law, there is also a positive reason, because General Procedural Law is the prototype for "Systemic Compliance Litigation", and in particular for the most advanced aspect of this, namely the duty of vigilance (III). In particular, it governs the actions that can be brought before the Courts (IV), and the principles around which proceedings are conducted, with an increased opposition between the adversarial principle, which marries the Compliance Obligation, since both reflect the principle of Information, and the rights of the defence, which do not necessarily serve them, a clash that will pose a procedural difficulty in principle (V).

Finally, and this "prototype" status is even more justified, because Compliance Law has given companies jurisdiction over the way in which they implement their legal Compliance Obligations, it is by respecting and relying on the principles of General Procedural Law that this must be done, in particular through not only sanctions but also internal investigations (VI).

________

► Full Reference: J.-Ch. Roda "La preuve de la bonne exécution de la Vigilance au regard du système probatoire de Compliance (Proof that Vigilance has been properly carried out with regard to the Compliance evidence system)", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L'Obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Éditions Lefebvre - Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", 2025, pp.679-689.

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, L'Obligation de Compliance, in which this article is published 

____

► English summary of this contribution : Taking the Duty of Vigilance as an illustration, the first part of the article examines the question of who must prove about that and in what order. There are no rules in the legal dispositions specific to the Vigilance Duty duty that expressly reverse the burden of proof, to the extent of placing it on the company that should demonstrate that it has correctly fulfilled its obligation. Instead, it is needed to return to general law, which makes the burden of proof vary according to the nature of the obligations incumbent on the company as a result of its Duty of Vigilance, in particular between simplly drawing up a plan and drawing it up such that its effectiveness can be expected to give rise to an obligation on those who dispute it to demonstrate its ineffectiveness. In any event, the 2 litigant parties immediately seek to fuel the debate with elements in their favour, whatever their position in the process.

This brings us to the second part of the article, devoted to the question of what constitutes proof of proper performance of the Vigilance Duty. Requiring proof of a positive fact and the constitution of a self-evidence of conformity would both be excessive and would distance the company from the Monumental Goals that are its compass. Instead, it is pertinent to distinguish between Compliance Structures, for which the proof requirements must be high, and Expected Compliance Actions, for which proof of efforts is sufficient, the obligation being only of means. In fact, companies will be wise to provide proof of their efforts as early as possible.

The third part therefore deals logically with the means of proof available to the parties. Claimants act on the principle of freedom of evidence and benefit from numerous sources of information, but the most serious difficulties arise when the facts to be proven are located outside the European Union. The company can establish that the plan has been implemented using various types of evidence, but it would appear that the standard of proof is high, even if the Vigilance Plan were to be regarded as an act of management.

________

🦉This article is available in full texte for people who follow  Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche teaching

► Référence complète : L. Aynès, "Comment l’arbitrage international peut être un renfort 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", 2025, pp.503-506.

____

📕lire une présentation générale de l'ouvrage, L'Obligation de Compliance, dans lequel cet article est publié

____

► Résumé de l'article (fait par le Journal of Regulation & Compliance - JoRC) : L'auteur part du constat premier comme quoi l'arbitrage international et la compliance sont naturellement ajustés puisqu'ils sont tous deux une manifestation de la mondialisation, expriment un dépassement des frontières, l'arbitrage pouvant reprendre les buts monumentaux de la compliance puisqu'il a engendré un ordre arbitral substantiellement global.

Mais l'obstacle réside dans la source de l'arbitrage demeure le contrat, l'arbitre n'exerçant qu'une juridiction temporaire dont la mission est donnée par ce contrat. Pourtant l'avènement de l'ordre global arbitral permet ce dépassement, l'arbitre puisant dans des normes dont les buts monumentaux de la compliance et les engagements des entreprises peuvent faire partie. Ce faisant l'arbitre devient un organe indirect de ce droit de la compliance dont on voit l'émergence.

Puis la contribution évoque une seconde évolution, qui pourrait faire de l'arbitre un organe direct de concrétisation de la compliance. Pour cela, il faut que l'arbitre non seulement contraigne à l'exécution d'obligation de faire, ce qui est déjà le mouvement au titre des mesures provisoire, mais encore ait une conception plus ample ce qu'est le conflit pour lequel une solution est requise, voire se libère un peu de cette source contractuelle qui le cerne. Cela est possiblement en train de se dessiner, en miroir de la transformation profonde de l'office du juge.

________

🦉Cet article est accessible en texte intégral pour les personnes inscrites aux enseignements de la Professeure Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

🌐suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter en vidéo MAFR Surplomb

🌐s'abonner à la Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Exerçant un pouvoir de sanction, le Régulateur doit informer la "personne concernée" de son droit de se taire (cons. const., 26 sept. 2025)", Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 27 septembre 2025

____

📧Lire par abonnement gratuit d'autres news de la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

____

► Résumé de l'article  : Le Conseil constitutionnel a rendu le 26 septembre 2025 une décision n°2025-1164 , Société Eurotitrisation et autres qui déclare une disposition du Code monétaire et financier contraire à la Constitution.

Le Conseil déclare, et cela ne surprend pas notamment parce qu'il enrichit une jurisprudence débutée en 2016 affirmant régulièrement le caractère constitutionnel et autonome du "droit de se taire", que le fait pour le CMF de ne pas contraindre la Commission des sanctions de l'Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF) à informer une personne concernée de son droit de se faire rend de ce meme fait le dispositif procédural organisé par ce texte (IV de l'art.L 621-15 CMF, qui ne formulait qu'en termes généraux l'obligation de respecter le principe du contradictoire et des droits de la défense, sans viser le droit de se taire) contraire à la Constitution.

Cette sanction, intègre donc la règle dans la loi française, car en censurant à effet immédiat un silence le Conseil injecte immédiatement le droit de se taire dans les procédues en cours devant la Commission des sanctions de l'AMF (I). La solution était prévisible et vaut pour toutes les Autorités de régulations (II). Mais elle montre les tensions entre l'exercice du pouvoir spécial de sanction, qui appelle le droit de se taire au profit des "personnes concernées" et le pouvoir général de régulation, dont la sanction n'est pourtant qu'un outil, régulation qui suppose l'obtention d'informations et supporte mal ce silence (III). Plus largement, c'est l'affrontement entre l'impératif des secrets et l'impératif de l'information qui se déroule (IV).

____

📧lire l'article publié le 27 septembre dans la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation 

► Référence complète : Civ. 1ière., 24 sept 2025, n°23-23.869, M c/ société Volkswagen Group France et société Volkswagen Bank Gesellschaft mit Beschraenkter Haftung 

____

► Référence complète : I. Kampourakis, « Transparency Legislation in Global Value Chains: Decentralization Market Power, and Global Hierarchies", in H.Shamir, B.Arora, S. Banerjee & T. Barkay (ed.), Modern Slavery and the Governance of Global Value Chains, Cambridge University Press, series "Development Trajectories in Global Value Chains", 2025, pp.70-94.

____

📗Lire l'ouvrage dans lequel cet article est publié

____

📝lire l'article

____

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

🌐subscribe to the Video Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MaFR Droit & Art

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance Law and Systemic Litigation", 15 September 2025, Madrid.

____

This speech is the opening speech of the event.

🧮 See the general program of the event

____

📅See the slides (not used), basis for this speechs

____

► Summary of the conference: This  manifestation, made fo many interventions, is about the role and the evolution of the in-house lawyers in the Europe on the move. I opened the event by focusing on the importance of the Compliance which drives the companies now, in the future and for the future. It is quite difficile because currently Compliance Law is quite misunderstund by almost every. Therefore the first part of my intervention has been the explanation of what is the very new branch of Law, built of political Monumental Goals (Compliance Law is not just the obligation to be conform with, just to obey), the specificity of European Compliance Monumental Goals (not only the sustainability of systems, but also the concern for present and future human beins implied in them). 

This systemic new branch of Law, humanist branch of Law in Europe put the Judge at its center.

Par translation, this is creating a new sort of Litigation : the Compliance Systemic Litigation. Its object is the future (as Compliance Law itselft).

Contrary to the "conformity", which might be left to algorithms, Compliance Law, inseparable to Systemic Litigation, are giving new role for Judges, for external lawyers and for internal lawyers.

________

► Référence complète : M. Nicolas-Gréciano, "Le caractère préventif de la compliance au prisme du droit pénal", in J. Marchand et A. Maymont (dir.), La compliance, droit privé, droit public, regards croisés, dossier, Cahiers de droit de l'entreprise n° 1, janvier-février 2025, 5ième article.

____

🦉Cet article est accessible en texte intégral pour les personnes inscrites aux enseignements de la Professeure Marie-Anne Frison-Roche

________