Public service, return assets, private property, concessionaire, public domain, property rights, contractual expropriation, public persons, Constitutional Council, European Convention on Human Rights
Analysis of the notion and regime of return assets in public service delegation contracts, and its implications on private property and public domain.
[...] The necessity of valorisation of the public domain -in principle, public domain of royal essence. -to develop the critique of rigidity. -today: economic valuation paradigm in vogue. Public entities have gradually become aware of the economic value of their assets. The need to valorize their properties then became apparent because these assets must generate financial resources. B. The attribution of real rights to the concessionaire on certain return goods -legislative amendments codified in the « Code general of the property of public persons and that of territorial collectivities. [...]
[...] -the right to property is not, however, absolute. Nevertheless, this circumstance authorizes derogation only in the conditions determined. It is thus that any forced acquisition by public persons, even for reasons of general interest (Constitutional Council, decision "Nationalisation of 1982) must respect the constitutional regime of private property: legislation is required and compensation guarantees must be offered (article 17 DDHC). qualifying the private assets of the concessionaire as assets to be returned, which will be integrated into the public person's assets, is akin to an irregular dispossession because it is carried out outside the defined framework, especially since the Constitutional Council itself had specified that the private property of the assets necessary for public service was not an obstacle to its execution as long as the contract had provided guarantees to ensure the continuity of the same with the option to purchase the said assets. [...]
[...] This is a general principle of law whose constitutional value has been recognized by the Constitutional Council. -finally, in reference to the observations of the rapporteur public in the case of 29 June 2018, reiterate the reasoning that led to extending the solution of 2012. B. A « expropriation contrary to the constitutional regime of private property -the right to property is a fundamental right protected at the international level, among other things, by the « European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms does not the additional protocol n°1 specify in its first article. [...]
[...] They grant real rights to the concessionaire on certain return goods established on public property to enable him to engage securities, for example, in order to obtain advantageous financing options. -The objective here is to encourage more public/private partnerships. -engages thus, for example; a movement of patrimonialization of the titles of the domain. Also, the law of January authorizes the territorial collectivities to grant on their public domain certain [...]
[...] Assets on Return and Property Rights - Introduction and Detailed Plan By a judgment « Minister of the Interior v. Community of Communes of the Ubaye Valley of 29 June 2018 concerning ski lifts of a ski resort, the Section of contentious proceedings The Council of State has provided new insights into the notion and regime of returned goods. Not only does it reaffirm the jurisprudence "Commune of Douai » (Council of State, 21/2012), but it goes further by applying it to the private goods of the concessionaire that he had acquired prior to the conclusion of the contract. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee