Council of State, administrative jurisdiction, prejudicial question, foreign court, legality of administrative acts, judicial authorities, competence distribution, BFG Bank Luxembourg SA, SCEA du Chéneau, Lugano Convention, Court of Cassation, penal judge, residence assignments, EU law, CJEU
The Council of State examines the competence of French administrative jurisdiction in assessing the validity of administrative acts formed on prejudicial questions of foreign courts and revisits the distribution of competences between administrative and judicial authorities.
[...] Solution : The Council of State responds positively. First, it rejects on the merits the request of the BFG Bank Luxembourg Society on the grounds that 'the contract to which the mayor intervened and the guarantee act he signed were not in conformity, as regards the duration of the loan which constituted an essential clause of the contract, with the terms of the deliberation ». The estimates therefore that the commune is reputed not to have given agreement. However, it is not this first aspect of the ruling that is interesting, it is the fact that the Council of State considers that the Administrative Court of Rennes is competent to rule, explaining that 'in the absence of a contrary stipulation in the Lugano Convention, the Administrative Court of Rennes could rule on the conclusions of validity of which it was seized'. [...]
[...] Thus, the Commission is a competent administrative jurisdiction to assess the legality of the decree of June and it is therefore wrong that it declared itself incompetent. Scope : Like any administrative jurisdiction, the National Appeal Commission for Conflicts of Affiliation to Non-Salaried Pension Funds can assess the legality of an individual administrative act. It would have been otherwise, as the Council of State clearly explained, if the exception had had the character of a preliminary question. - Council of State October 2011, SCEA du Chéneau Accroche : By its judgment of 17 October 2011 'SCEA du Chéneau', the Council of State revisits the distribution of competences between the administrative and judicial authorities in the assessment of the legality of an administrative act. [...]
[...] Procedure : The National Appeal Commission for Conflicts of Affiliation to the Non-Salaried Pension Funds being seized of this exception has stayed its decision until the competent jurisdiction has ruled. The Council of State was then seized, in particular by the Compensation Fund of the Autonomous National Organization of Industry and Commerce, in order to assess the legality of the decree of 12 June 1952. Question : Is the National Appeal Commission for Conflicts of Affiliation to the Non-Salaried Pension Funds a judicial authority that can thus assess the legality of a decree? Solution : The Council of State responds positively. [...]
[...] Question : Is the repressive jurisdiction competent to assess the legality of residence assignments? Solution : The Court of Cassation responds positively and quashes the judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal, citing in particular Article 2 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen and Article 111-5 of the Penal Code, which states that 'penal jurisdictions are competent to interpret administrative, regulatory or individual acts and to assess their legality when, from this examination, depends the solution of the penal trial submitted to them'. [...]
[...] From there, the BFG Bank Luxembourg company brought the matter before the Administrative Tribunal of Rennes so that it could be ruled that the mayor did not exceed the powers he held from the deliberation. On July the Administrative Tribunal rejected this request. As a result, the case was brought before the Council of State by the BFG Bank Luxembourg company. Question : Can the administrative jurisdiction know of the validity of an administrative act on a prejudicial question of a foreign court ? [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee