The European Directive of 22 October 2014 ot the European Parliament and of the Council as regard disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large undertaking  and groupe  comes from afar.

Some present it as a step of an "irrestible rises  of Corporate Social Responsabilité.  This text would be a  a "step forward" and a "strong signal".

It is true the Directive of the European Parliament and the Council follows a consultation conducted for several years by the European Commission on the subject of Social Responsibility. Whatever might have said the "stakeholders", the Directive contains the same lines tham the European Commission Communication of 13 April 2011, adopted on 25 October 2011 on the topic.

It is difficult today to oppose "Hard Law" and "Soft Law": Law hardens gradually. Thus, from the "communication", we went to the "resolutions", whose status remains uncertain, both a communication firmer but less binding than a law, since resolution is only for its author ... Thus Parliament in its resolutions of 6 February 2013 'resolved' to design an "inclusive" vision of the corporate action, to dance together profitability and social justice. To get by,  it must suffice to say that the Social Responsibility Company is "multidimensional" ... Guidelines of the European Commission (non-binding) will explicit. Wait and see.

Following a series of obligations on information that companies must make available "to the public and authorities." Thus, companies must do the work instead of public authorities themselves. The provisions relating to non-financial information are mandatory and standardized. They are particularly demanding on the environment.

But when the text provides more substantial obligations, such as making the activity business less polluting, the Directive simply ask the member states to encourage companies to adopt "best practices" in the field. The market itself is incitative, in particular for making boards of large corporations more diverses. Because the principle is the belief that "investor access to non-financial information is a step towards achieving the goal of effective .... Europe in the use of resources," in a regulatory context of a "smart, sustainable and inclusive" growth".

Constitutional Law will have an increasingly important role to play in regulatory Law. This is especially true since the State Council uses its power to filter itself become a sort of Constitutional Court or maybe a Supreme Court.

One can think so reading the UBS decision on the 5th of November 2014.

Indeed, to refuse to transmit to the Conseil constitutionnel (French Constitutional Council)  the priority question of constitutionality formulated by UBS, the French Council of State gives what it believes to be the correct interpretation of the constitutional principle of legality of offenses and penalties in banking regulatory Law.

So to say there is no "question", the Conseil d'État says there is no "problem" because, through the interpretation it gives, the provisions of the Code Monétaire et Financier offers to the Supervisory Authority, the Autorité de Contrôle Prudentiel et de Résolution (ACPR), the power to sanction the bank for having not properly implemented its internal control, comply with the constitutional principle of legality of offenses and penalties, which is applicable in administrative repression.

But because to estimate that there is no "question", it must be said that there is no "problem", it is assumed that the High Administrative Court has acted as Constitutional Court.

We must take note. Is this really what the Constituent wanted by instituting a filter system by the constitutional law of the 23rd July 2008 establishing the priority question on constitutionality? Indeed, in this very sensitive and decisive question of repression in banking and finance, is it not at least to the French Constitutional Council itself to say the authoritative interpretation to remember that the constitutional text it is the guardian?

The administration of President Barack Obama issued November 26, 2014 a draft of 25 November 2014, coming from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and subject to contributions to regulate the emission of greenhouse gases.

Companies are protesting because this will increase the cost of regulation. We are now witnessing a clash between supporters of the economic strength of the country and the promoters of the environment.

The President's rationale is this: that environmental regulation is justified because it will prevent many diseases and even death from respiratory failure. However, social programs and Obamacare are the major challenges of his presidency.

Therefore, the discussion is about the relationship between "regulation" and "sector": if the Regulation is related simply to the environment, then the argument of additional financial regulation advanced by firms is relevant.

Indeed, the principle of proportionality being key in regulatory techniques, there is disproportionality between the means and the goal.

The Conseil d'État (French State Council)l issued a ruling Sept. 19, 2014, Agence pour l'enseignement français à l'étranger, which does not involve a regulated sector but is very instructive for all of them.

Indeed, the term "guidelines" is common in how each and designates certain documents prepared by the regulatory authorities. These give themselves this appellation to documents made ex ante to give operators the "outline" of the future action of the regulator. Thus, the "guidelines" would produce legal certainty while maintaining flexibility, since in the future the authority will continue to set its position on a case by case basis.

This convinced the Conseil d'État, which expressed his support for the "droit souple (soft law)" in its annual report in 2013.

Now comes the case: it was necessary that the "hard right" come bless the "soft law".

In this case, was challenged before the administrative judge an "instruction" from this Agency for French Teaching Abroad for the "consideration of the financial situation of the parents" seeking a scholarship to the child. A local agency for awarding grants had rejected a request no meeting the criteria developed in the statement. Parents have acted appeal for abuse of power. They both lost before the Cour administrative d'appel de Paris (Administrative Court of Pari) that before the Conseil d'État.

However, the Council recognizes that the Agence pour l'enseignement français à l'étranger  has no regulatory power. But the judgement takes in considération that:"l'instruction en cause a énoncé, à l'intention des commissions locales, des lignes directrices, sans fixer de normes à caractère général qui se serait imposée de matière impérative à ces commissions"!footnote-8 .

To read the presentation (in French), click on the French flag.

When one likes the "Financial law," one is delighted to open the second edition of the Droit financier (Financial Law), Frenche book written by Anne-Dominique Merville and publishes at Gualino - Lextenso édition (392 p.).

Indeed, the reader learns the most recent technical rules. If it is difficult to know "Financial law" this is because it doesn't really constitute a "branch of the law." It seems an accumulation of laws, rules, decisions  and soft law adopted to serve the financial market.

Significantly way, in the book construction, there is no place especially for the "financial Regulation" while itsTitle II is about " Les régulateurs des marchés financiers" (The financial market regulators). This suggests that the financial regulatory system is primarily due to the regulatory body. This is maybe true.
Reading developments, it is observed that the European Central Bank is listed among "The financial market regulators".

For my part, for several years I do think that a central bank is a regulator. But as it is currently a supervisor and that there is a fundamental distinction between regulation and supervision. It's why it is necessary to demonstrate the transition from one to the other or intimacy between them, to affirm so easily that a central bank, monetary authority, is a financial regulator.

Yet the author assume acquired, showing that the qualification is already in the mind. The development will come after. It will impose yet because this change of qualification has important consequences. It involves jurisdictionalization of Central Banks that we still do not know and have not conceived.