Administrative Liability Regimes

Extract

[...] The administration therefore has a duty to help the victims who are unfairly affected by a damage. In addition, the victim has a right to a reasonable period of judgment Ass June 2002, Min. of Justice v. Magiera). This regime therefore concerns liability for risk (the risk incurred by collaborators of the administration or due to damage caused by dangerous things/activities, liability for public works or uses and finally liability for gatherings and assemblies), liability for breach of equality before public burdens (irregular administrative acts, liability for acts of laws/international conventions with, for example, the decision CE October 2020, Sté Lactalis Ingrédients and liability for permanent damage to public works). [...]

[...] In fact, administrative responsibility is now widely accepted. Administrative liability can be defined as the obligation that falls on the administration to repair the damages caused either by its action (its activities, its agents) or by its inaction. This principle of administrative liability was developed by the Council of State, in its Rotschild decision dated December It was then taken up by the famous Blanco decision rendered by the Council of State on February This liability can therefore be engaged in the event of an administrative fault: personal fault or fault of service. [...]

[...] More recently, it has been judged that the State can cause an ecological damage that it is up to it to repair (TA Paris February 2021, Asso. Oxfam France, Asso. Notre Affaire à tous, Fondation for Nature and Man, Asso. Greenpeace France). As for the causal link, it is up to the victim to prove that the generating fact is the direct cause of the damage. The administrative judge, in order to pronounce, will then use the so-called method of adequate causality in case of doubt. [...]

[...] In addition, the administrative judge has the possibility of supporting a beginning of proof. Note that the absence of a causal link is a public order means that the judge can raise ex officio. A possible exoneration of the administration's liability Like in penal law for physical persons, the administration can exonerate itself from its liability. This exoneration can be either total or partial. It occurs in the event of the victim's fault, that is to say when the victim has contributed to the realization of the damage they have suffered. [...]

[...] There is thus a real consistency between civil and administrative law. Firstly, it is necessary to recall that not all types of faults engage the responsibility of the administration. In fact, the fault must meet several criteria: the fault must be illegal and must also be the cause of a prejudice. Three types of fault are then to be distinguished: personal fault and fault of service (TC July 1873 Pelletier), simple fault and heavy fault and finally presumed or proven fault. [...]