Mesures à vocation extraterritoriale et lois de police: un revers à l'hégémonie juridique outre-Atlantique?


Recueil Dalloz

2015, vol. 2015, n°21, pp.1260-1263

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : Conflit de lois, Contrat et obligations, Loi applicable, Embargo à destination de l’Iran, Loi de police

En application de l’article 9 du règlement « Rome I » il ne peut être donné effet à une loi de police étrangère que s’il s’agit d’une loi de police du lieu d’exécution du contrat et si cette loi de police rend illégale l’exécution du contrat. En l’espèce, sans avoir à se prononcer sur la qualification de loi de police des dispositions du code des réglementations fédérales (CFR), instituant un embargo sur les exportations à destination de l’Iran, la cour ne peut donner d’effet à la loi américaine, qui n’est ni une loi de police française, ni une loi de police iranienne

The corporate domicile: is the "real seat" theory always pertinent?


Journal of Business Law

2015, vol. 8, pp.620-633

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : Companies, Company incorporation, Comparative law, Domicile, EU law, France, Netherlands, Place of effective management, Registered offices, United States

Discusses the different rules used in jurisdictions such as France, the UK, the US and the Netherlands concerning a company's registered office, and whether the "real seat" theory or the incorporation theory is now most influential. Reviews the continuing relevance of the real seat in many EU states, its key features, and its application in case law. Examines the factors contributing to the growing influence of the incorporation theory in Europe.

The Future of International Regulatory Cooperation: TTIP as a Learning Process Toward a Global Policy Laboratory


Law and Contemporary Problems

2015, vol. 78, n°4, pp.103-136

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : TTIP, Regulatory Cooperation, Convergence, Divergence, Mutual Recognition, Equivalence, MRA, US-EU, race to the bottom

At the time of the negotiations of 'new generation' trade agreements, such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, this article focuses on an important consideration that may be neglected in current efforts to attain international regulatory convergence (IRC): The benefits of learning from regulatory variation, and the design of institutions

The Regulatory Cooperation Chapter of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Institutional Structures and Democratic Consequences


Journal of International Economic Law

2015, vol. 18, pp.625-640

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) has the potential to remake political and legal relationships between the European Union (EU) and the USA and pave the way to a new form of global economic governance based on internationalregulatory cooperation. In particular, TTIP presents an historic opportunity for the EU and the USA to remove regulatory divergence—today’s most prominent obstacle to trade exchanges—thereby increasing economic growth for the citizens of both polities. Yet, the EU and the USA have been attempting to reduce trade barriers since the 1970s. Despite decades of cooperation, EU and US policymakers too often fail to mutually understand each other’s positions, giving rise to regulatory differences. As an international agreement predicted to contain a Horizontal Chapter—an innovative approach to international trade treaty-making containing a framework for future bilateral regulatory cooperation—TTIP has the potential to transform this impasse, if approached correctly. The envisaged chapter would provide a ‘gateway’ for handling sectoral regulatory issues between the EU and the USA, including by addressing both legislation and non-legislative acts, regardless of the level at which they are adopted and by whom. Yet with great promises come challenges too.This article focusses on the structure, scope, discipline, institutional design, enforcement,and implementation of the envisaged horizontal chapter, often defined Regulatory Cooperation Chapter. In so doing, it addresses some of the concerns currently raised by civil society, in particular the fear of a ‘race to the bottom’ that may stem from the operation of this chapter and provides some recommendations

The Sanctity of Borderland: The Ukraine-Related Sanction Programs


Diritto del Commercio Internazionale

2015, vol. 1, pp.239-257

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

In October 2014 the Russian press agency ITAR-TASS has published a curious table picturing the Russian business entities targeted with international economic sanctions in relation to the political crisis in Ukraine (1). The table shows that these entities change depending on the country enacting the sanctions. For example Gazprombank, the third largest Russian bank, is targeted by the United States, the European Union, and Canada, while Bank Rossiya, which is the private bank of President Putin’s inner circle, is not subject to any sanction by the EU (2). By the same token, no sanction is established by the EU against privately owned companies, while the US, Canada and Australia target some, like Rosneft, the world’s largest oil producer. Moreover, while the EU addresses some entities making business in Crimea, like the sea transport company Sevastopol Commercial Seaport, the US does it only marginally, and so do Canada and Australia. Finally, only the US is active against companies operating in the military sector; in this regard, the EU targets only Concern Almaz-Antey, a firm specialized in anti-aircraft defence systems. As a whole, the table raises concerns as to the effectiveness of these «targeted sanctions», when they work in such an intermittent fashion.At the center of our analysis stand the economic sanctions adopted against certain private subjects participating in the uprising of the Eastern part of Ukraine against Kyiv’s central government (3). These sanctions are grounded on the alleged violation of the «sanctity» of Ukrainian borders—a quite curious qualification, though, given that Ukraine’s name itself means, in fact, «on the edge», «borderland» (4). If these sanctions represent the typical reaction to violations of international law perpetrated by the Russian Federation, why are they applied selectively? Which are the policies behind the choice of targeting one entity but not another? Arguably, a lack of coordination globally might ultimately frustrate the sanctions’ genuine goals and create inconsistencies in their enforcement.This article examines the reasons and consequences of such lack of coordination (5). It proceeds along with three lines. First, it investigates the factual premises that triggered the adoption of targeted sanctions (§ 2); second, it delineates the scope and effects of the targeted sanction regimes elaborated in the US and the EU (§ 3); finally, it highlights some flaws in the sanctions regimes as a whole (§ 4). In doing this, it tries to challenge the common impression that no one is doing anything with the Ukrainian crisis: someone is definitely doing something about the violations committed against Ukraine’s territorial integrity. The problem, yet, is that the system continues to be imperfect due to the existing differences among States in approaching individual targeted sanctions

Free Trade Agreements after the Treaty of Lisbon in the Light of the Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union


European Law Journal

novembre 2014, vol. 20, n°6, pp.749-762

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) are increasingly employed by the European Union (EU) as a tool of its internal market and external relations policy. This article addresses the evolution of FTAs through the jurisprudential lens of the Court of Justice of the EU. To this end, and after clarifying key constitutional issues (competence, substance and hierarchy), it discusses the Court's case-law on the direct effect of certain measures, and addresses a selection of cross-functional questions regarding the interpretation of material law founded in the Court's case-law. As a matter of general tendency, the jurisprudence takes a rather liberal stance in recognising direct effects of FTAs concerning analogical interpretation of economic freedom. By contrast, a more restrictive approach appears to have been applied to the interpretation of provisions having an impact on the possibility of third states' citizens to reside in the EU

L'affaire Eurotunnel-SeaFrance : une mésentente cordiale en manque d'Europe


Le Droit Maritime Français

janvier 2014, vol. 66, pp.3-13

Départements : Droit et fiscalité

Le juge et les études d'impact


Revue Française d'Administration Publique

2014, vol. 1, n°149, pp.179-194

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : Analyse d’impact contrôle juridictionnel transparence données empiriques élaboration des politiques publiques Impact Analysis judicial review empirical data public policy-making.

Cette contribution vise à explorer le rôle que le juge est amené à jouer dans le cadre des études d’impact de projets de loi ou d’actes réglementaires, et tout particulièrement leurs interactions, qui sont de plus en plus fréquentes. Elle montre comment ces instruments d’évaluation de l’impact législatif améliorent la rationalité et le caractère démocratique du processus décisionnel, mais aussi sa transparence et son accessibilité au public, tout en le soumettant à un contrôle juridictionnel de plus en plus approfondi. Au vu de l’utilisation accrue des instruments d’étude d’impact par les juridictions, celles-ci – lorsqu’elles sont amenées à décider de la légalité d’une mesure législative – ne se focalisent plus exclusivement sur le résultat du processus décisionnel, mais davantage sur la procédure ayant amené à l’adoption de l’acte en cause. Après avoir systématisé les différentes possibilités de « rencontres » entre les études d’impact, d’une part, et les juridictions, d’autre part, cet article identifie – à travers une analyse de la jurisprudence développée par des juridictions nationales et internationales – les conséquences normatives résultant de ces rencontres. Nous démontrerons que si l’inclusion des études d’impact dans le processus décisionnel empêche les décideurs politiques de prendre des décisions irrationnelles, leur intégration progressive dans le contrôle juridictionnel amène les juges à ne plus décider sur la base d’intuitions ou d’anecdotes, mais plutôt à se fonder sur des arguments empiriquement solides. Ce procédé vertueux est susceptible d’améliorer le cycle d’élaboration des politiques publiques

Le système européen des comptes nationaux et régionaux (S.E.C. 2010)


Journal de Droit Européen

2014, pp.413-416

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Les états membres sont soumis à des règles de comptabilité qui permettent de mesurer leur activité économique et financière.Entré en vigueur le 1er septembre 2014, le règlement dit "S.E.C. 2010" permet à la Commission européenne d'exercer un meilleur contrôle sur le déficit et la dette des Etats membres

Nudging Legally - On the Checks and Balances of Behavioural Regulation


International Journal of Constitutional Law

avril 2014, vol. 12, n°2, pp.429-456

Départements : Droit et fiscalité, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : behavioural sciences, administrative law, nudges, regulation, regulatory policy, policymaking, global administrative law, behavioural policy, impact assessment, randomized control trials, judicial review

As behavioural sciences are unearthing the complex cognitive framework in which people make decisions, policymakers seem increasingly ready to design behaviourally-informed regulations to induce behaviour change in the interests of the individual and society. After discussing what behavioural sciences have to offer to administrative law, this paper explores the extent to which administrative law may accommodate their findings into the regulatory process. After presenting the main regulatory tools capable of operationalizing behavioural insights, it builds a case for integrating them into public policymaking. In particular, this paper examines the challenges and frictions of behavioural regulation with regard both to established features of administrative law, such as the principle of legality, impartiality and judicial oversight and more innovative control mechanisms such as the use of randomized control trials to test new public policies. This analysis suggests the need to develop a legal framework capable of ensuring that behavioural considerations may inform the regulatory process while at the same time guaranteeing citizens' constitutional rights and freedoms vis-à-vis the Regulatory State