►This scientific event is placed under the scientific responsibility of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Juliette Morel Maroger and Sophie Schiller. It is organized by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and by the Centre de recherche en Droit (CR2D) of Paris Dauphine-PSL University.
Judges, regulatory and supervisory authorities, or even authorities specially instituted by Compliance Law, such as the Agence Française Anticorruption (French Anticorruption Agency), must implement it.
The colloquium aims initially to identify and discuss the procedural rules that they then specifically implement, in particular when the strong requirements of Compliance Law, efficiency and immediacy, new negotiation techniques and commitment, must be articulated with the traditional procedural requirements that remain.
The question arises in particular as to whether the rules of a fair trial should apply (or can they be similar in transactional procedures and in the context of judicial procedures, and how the control by judges operates during homologation) in transactional procedures, with more or less specific treatment of the evidence used.
Secondly, the colloquium considers the way in which the different judges assess the different constitutive standards of Compliance Law. These are often soft Law and depending on whether the judge is repressive, administrative, or European, his or her assessment will not be legally of the same scope or of the same nature, which together leads to an issue of articulation of method. Due to the breadth of the subject, certain sectors will be particularly examined, in particular the banking sector.
Thirdly, the way in which the judge himself or herself applies Compliance Law will be examined, in what appears to be a balance between pedagogy and sanction. It then appears to play a triple role, in that it ensures compliance with standards but also in that it must find effective solutions in a Law which is more in Ex Ante than in Ex Post and that it must support operators so that they act effectively, by mastering their obligations. The motivation for decisions then appears to be a primary issue.
Because this last phase concerns the even more direct relationship between the judge and the operators and stakeholders, this theme is intended to give rise to a presentation and a round table.
►Full reference : Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Panthéon-Assas University (Paris II), Le "contrat de compliance (The "compliance contract"') Paris, 12 June 2026.
To register for in-person or remote attendance: ...
As the number of places is limited, you will be asked to confirm your attendance 48 hours in advance.
🧮The event will take place in the auditorium, Rue Notre-Dame-des-Champs, 75006 Paris, on 12 June 2026, between 9.30 a.m. and 1.30 p.m.
_____
► Presentation of the topic : Companies have a legal obligation to put "compliance structures" in place, such as whistleblowing mechanisms, plans, information gathering systems and data security systems. Many adopt a management strategy that leads them to choose to outsource the implementation of this obligation, or even to outsource the compliance structure itself, which then most often takes the form of a platform, even though responsibility cannot be transferred. But the line between structure and behaviour, between responsibility for the decision and its implementation, becomes blurred.
The hypothesis examined here through the "Compliance Contract", which should not be confused with compliance clauses but which is linked to them, is the widespread use by companies of this type of contract, the existence and typology of which was identified in 2022. Corresponding to a very significant share of the "compliance market", perhaps a specific market, it could constitute a special contract, requiring at the very least a specific regime, either under Competition Law, Data Law, particularly Personal Data Law, etc.
____
Speakers will include :
🎤Bruno Deffains, Professor of Economics at the University of Paris Panthéon-Assas (Paris II)
🎤 Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Professor of Regulatory Law and Compliance, Director of the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC)
On 4 July 2012, the Conseil d’Etat (French Council of State) issued a rejection decision validating ARCEP’s dismissal to prosecute in an enforcement case initiated by an association of operators, AFORST. This case brings a broad look back on many years of ARCEP’s regulation of the electronic communications sector and more precisely on the pricing obligations imposed on the incumbent France Telecom within wholesale fixed markets. It provides interesting guidance on the enforcement procedure and on other recourses for competitors to ensure effectiveness of regulated prices.
French
Le 4Juillet2012,le Conseil d’Etata rendu un arrêt validantl'arrêt de la procédure, du fait de la renonciation par l’ARCEPd’engager des poursuitesdans une affaired’exécutionengagée par uneassociation d’opérateurs, l’AFORST.Cette affaireapporte un perspective sur de nombreuses annéesen de régulation de l’ARCEPdans lesecteur des communications électroniquesnet plus précisément surles obligationsimposées auxprix fixes de l’opérateur historique,France Télécom,dans lesmarchés de gros.Elle fournit des indicationsintéressantes surla procédure d’exécutionet surd’autres recourspour les concurrentsafin d’assurerl’effectivité de larégulation des prix.
In a report published on October 26th, 2010, the Autorité de Régulation de la République Islamique de Mauritanie (the Mauritanian Multi-sector Regulatory Authority) orders three mobile telephony operators to enhance quality of service provided in the country. Mauritel SA, Mattel SA and Chinguitel SA all have one month from October 26th, 2010, to comply with their obligations to provide less than 5% of dropped phone calls.
FRENCH
Fiche thématique (Télécommunications): L'Autorité de Régulation mauritanienne ordonne à trois opérateurs de téléphonie mobile d'augmenter leur qualité de service.
Dans un rapport publié le 26 octobre 2010, l'Autorité de Régulation de la République Islamique de Mauritanie ordonne à trois opérateurs d'augmenter la qualité des services délivrée dans le pays. Mauritel SA, Mattel SA et Chinguitel SA disposent d'un mois à partir du 26 octobre 2010 pour se conformer à leur obligation de fournir moins de 5% de perte d'appels téléphoniques.
GERMAN
Thematischer Bericht (Telekom): Die Regulierungsbehörde Mauretanien befehlt, dass drei Mobilfunkanbieter die Dienstqualität verbessern.
In einem Bericht, der am 26. Oktober 2010 veröffentlicht wurde, hat die Autorité de Régulation de la République Islamique de Mauritanie (die multi-sektorielle Regulierungsbehörde der Islamische Republik Mauretanien) befehlt, dass drei Mobilfunkanbieter die Dienstqualität verbessern. Mauritel SA, Mattel SA und Chinguitel SA verfügen über einen Monat ab dem 26. Oktober 2010, um weniger als 5% unterbrochener Anrufe anzubieten.
SPANISH
Informe Temático (Telecom): La Autoridad Regulatoria de Mauritania ordena a tres operadores de teléfonos móviles de incrementar su calidad de servicio.
En un informe publicado el 26 de octubre del 2010, la Autorité de Réglation de l République Islamique de Mauritanie (la Autoridad regulatoria multi-sector de Mauritania) ordena a tres operadoras de teléfonos móviles de realzar la calidad del servicio proveído en el país. Se les ha dado un mes comenzando el 26 de octubre del 2010 tanto a Mauritel SA, Mattel SA como Chinguitel SA para llenar los requisitos y cumplir con las obligaciones de proveer menos del 5% de llamadas cortadas.
CHINESE
主题性报告（电信）：毛里塔尼亚监管机构勒令三家移动电信运营商提高其服务质量。
在2010年10月26日所公布的报告当中，Autorité de Régulation de la République Islamique de Mauritanie（毛里塔尼亚伊斯兰共和国跨部门监管机构）勒令该国三家移动电信运营商改善其国内电信服务质量。自2010年10月26日起，Mauritel SA, Mattel SA and Chinguitel SA三家公司要在一个月期限之内将其通话掉线率控制在5%以内。
In The Journal of Regulation the summaries’ translation are done by the Editors and not by the authors
ENGLISH
The French Loi de finance rectificative pour 2011 (Rectified Budget for 2011) was censured by the Conseil constitutionnel (French Constitutional Council) after being adopted by Parliament, but before it was published in the Journal officiel de la République Française (Official Journal of the French Republic), as a simple law can not limit the power available to the independent regulator of hiring. The "Conseil constitutionnel" does not allow the "Loi de Finances" to ask a general limit of the Regulator workforce, paid by the State. Consequently, the "Loi de Finances 2012" will not give up the will of Parliament to limit the numbers but will do in a precise and quantitative way.
FRENCH
LaLoi definancesrectificativepour 2011a été censuré parle Conseil constitutionnel,après avoir étéadoptée par le Parlement, mais avantd’avoir été publiéeau Journal officielde la République française, car une loi simple ne peut limiter le pouvoir autonome d’embauche du régulateur. Le Conseil constitutionnel n’admet pas que la loi de finance puisse poser d’une façon générale la limite des effectifs du régulateur, payés par l’Etat. En conséquence, la loi de finance pour 2012 ne renoncera pas à la volonté du Parlement de limiter ces effectifs mais le fera d’une façon précise et chiffrée.
SPANISH
El Loi de finances rectificative pour 2011 (presupuesto rectificado de 2011) fue censurado por el Conseil Constitutionnel (Consejo Constitucional francés) después de haber sido aprobada por el Parlamento, pero antes de su publicación en el Journal Officiel de la République Française (Diario Oficial de la francesa República), como una simple ley no puede limitar la potencia disponible para el regulador independiente de la contratación.
ITALIAN
La loi de finance rectificative pour 2011 (legge finanziaria per il 2011) è stata modificata dal Conseil Constitutionnel (la Corte costituzionale francese) dopo essere stata votata in parlamento e prima di essere stata pubblicata alla Gazzetta ufficiale della Repubblica francese.
to be published in the Compliance & Regulation Series , co published by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant.
