Suspension of 24-Month Exclusion from Dijon Halles Market

Extract

[...] It is widely taken into account, in each case, the circumstances of time and place. In this case, the measure of exclusion of Mr. M. for a period of 24 months from the city center market of Dijon does not appear to be proportionate, in the duration, to the importance of the alleged disturbance in that other means could have been considered in order to avoid disorder (the materiality of which is contested, otherwise), less restrictive and less detrimental to the freedom of trade and industry and the rules of competition. [...]

[...] The decision holds that Mr. M. would not respect the instructions given by the placiers. This fact, however, is denied by the placiers themselves. Also, no aggressive attitude towards other traders can be attributed to Mr. M. In this regard, a petition is signed by several market traders at the Halles market attesting to their good relations. Mr. M. encounters no problems in other markets where he benefits from a location. [...]

[...] In this case, Article L. 2224-18 of the General Code of Territorial Collectivities provides that 'the regime of parking and parking rights on markets and halls is defined in accordance with the provisions ( . ) of a regulation established by the municipal authority after consultation with the relevant professional organizations.' This regime is defined by the 1979 decree which provides in its article 27 relating to sanctions that 'any infringement of this regulation will be prosecuted in accordance with the laws and regulations in force', without further details on the prosecution. [...]

[...] This exclusion measure against Mr. M. is all the more disproportionate, in its scope as well, as it targets Mr. M.'s activity both as a merchant holding a stall and as an employee or collaborator of another merchant. However, Mr. M. regularly works as an employee of his partner, Mrs. B. Justine. Mr. [...]

[...] The mayor has thus made a bad interpretation of the sense and scope of the rule of law. Therefore, the bad interpretation of the rule of law taints the mayor's decision of illegality for error of law. Thirdly, the proportionality of the police measure : In law, The general administrative police measure must be 'adapted, necessary and proportionate to its purpose'. The Council of State has recently adopted this new formulation, known as the triple test Ass October 2011, Association for the promotion of the image and other), which applies to police measures since the Dieudonné ordinances of 2014. [...]