Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Alternative Dispute Resolution in French Administrative Proceedings

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Alternative Dispute Resolution in European Administrative Law

Abstract

The French system of administrative justice is traditionally attached to the administrative court (the Conseil d’É tat). That is why administrative appeal is mostly optional, even if some mandatory appeals are provided by special legislation. A small part of the doctrine inclines toward the generalization of mandatory administrative appeals, but there are still strong traditional approaches that mandatory appeals add to the procedures and that impartial judicial review is the sole venue where citizens may find their rights and interests duly heard. Many independent bodies (Autorités administratives indépendantes) combining regulatory powers with adjudicatory ones are considered at least in part as an alternative to courts, as they offer redress before individuals need to consider court action. The Ombudsman (Défenseur des droits), who succeeded in 2010 to the Médiateur de la République, still has to prove his novelty and efficiency. The transplantation of other ADR tools may though be encouraged by the European Union, and so mediation, conciliation, and transactions are making their way into the system. But the question still remains whether or not these tools will be entirely part of the French administrative culture in the coming decades.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In some specific issues as tax litigation, the judge may also replace the decision of the administration.

  2. 2.

    On French administrative law culture in general, see Bell (2001), pp. 153 et seq.

  3. 3.

    These are mostly focused on mediation: Pauliat (2010), pp. 39–53; Boumakani (2003), pp. 863–888; for a theoretical and comparative approach: Boyron (2007), pp. 283–307.

  4. 4.

    For instance: Cadiet (2005) and Moneger (2002).

  5. 5.

    Société de Législation comparée (2008), 107 p.

  6. 6.

    Guillaume-Hofnung (2012): the pages dedicated to administrative law go from 35 to 36 and then from 55 to 58, so approximately six pages.

  7. 7.

    http://www.u-paris2.fr/CEMARC/0/fiche___laboratoire/ (informations provided only in French).

  8. 8.

    Conseil d’Etat- Etude (1993), 163 p (not available online).

  9. 9.

    Conseil d’Etat-Etude (2008) (not available online).

  10. 10.

    Conseil d’Etat-Etude (2010).

  11. 11.

    CE, 19/05/1893, Ville d’Aix-les-Bains; C.E., 3/03/1989, Sté Area, rec. 69. See also C.E., avis, 6/03/1986, EuroDisneyland.

  12. 12.

    CAA de Lyon, 4ème ch., 27/12/2007, SA Lagarde et Meregnani.

  13. 13.

    Patrikios (1997), pp. 131 et seq.

  14. 14.

    Séminaire de Créteil (2000).

  15. 15.

    The Constitution comprises the Constitution of the 4th of October 1958, the Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen of 1789, the Preamble to the 1946 Constitution, and the principes fondamentaux reconnus par les lois de la République (identified by case law, mainly that of the Conseil constitutionnel).

  16. 16.

    Under article 55 of the French Constitution, treaties are superior to parliamentary statutes.

  17. 17.

    Rapp and Terneyre (2002), p. 1629.

  18. 18.

    Ordinance (type of regulatory rule) of 4 May, 2000.

  19. 19.

    Article 2 of the Décret-loi of 30 September, 1953.

  20. 20.

    CE, 27/05/1991, Ville de Genève, rec. 205: action taken by Geneva local authorities against a decision concerning a nuclear plant located in the frontier with France.

  21. 21.

    Decree of 11 January, 1965.

  22. 22.

    Auby (1997), pp. 10–15 and 10–11.

  23. 23.

    Prevedourou (1996), pp. 167–180.

  24. 24.

    Brisson (1996a), pp. 7–15.

  25. 25.

    The expression recours de droit commmun is often used.

  26. 26.

    For a detailed analysis, see Michel (1996), pp. 47–98.

  27. 27.

    Brisson (1996b), pp. 793–842 and 799.

  28. 28.

    Auby (1955), pp. 117–124 and 118–119.

  29. 29.

    See, for example, CE, 30/06/1950, Queralt.

  30. 30.

    See, for example, Auby (1997), op. cit., p. 11.

  31. 31.

    Michel (1996), op. cit., p. 57. For a critical analysis, see Hourson (2012).

  32. 32.

    See, generally, Chapus (2008), pp. 652–658; Michel (1996), op. cit., pp. 228–238.

  33. 33.

    As mentioned above, there is no limitation period for the administratif appeal itself.

  34. 34.

    This basic principle has been regularly upheld since it was first established in some old decisions of the Conseil d’Etat: CE, 13/04/1881, Bonsais, rec. 431; CE, 14/01/1887, L’Union des gaz, rec. 43. (At this time, the limitation was 3 months and not 2.) See also CE, 10/07/1964, Centre medico-pédagogique de Beaulieu, rec. 399.

  35. 35.

    Chapus (2008), op. cit., p. 654.

  36. 36.

    The term used for such an appeal is recours administratif préalable obligatoire.

  37. 37.

    As mentioned above, the recours de tutelle, whether mandatory or facultative, are always statutory.

  38. 38.

    Decree no. 2001-407 of 7th May, 2001.

  39. 39.

    For lists of mandatory appeals existing by the mid-1990s, see Michel (1996), op. cit., pp. 32–40; Prevedourou (1996), pp. 114–150.

  40. 40.

    Decree no. 2012-765 of 10th May, 2012. See Erstein (2012).

  41. 41.

    Brisson (1996a), op. cit., pp. 438–446; Michel (1996), op. cit., pp. 30–31; Prevedourou (1996), pp. 108–111.

  42. 42.

    The law of 31st December 1987 on reforming administrative litigation stated that the Conseil d’Etat would determine by decree the conditions under which administrative litigation or arbitration must necessarily be preceded by prior administrative appeals or conciliation. However, there was no follow-up to this provision.

  43. 43.

    Schrameck (2008); Belda (2008), pp. 1483–1511.

  44. 44.

    Brisson (1996b), op. cit., pp. 823–841.

  45. 45.

    OJ of the 15 February, 1995, p. 2518.

  46. 46.

    Then the judge verifies that the transaction is legal: CE, sect., 5/01/1966, Hawezack, rec. 6.

  47. 47.

    TC, 18/06/2007, Soc. Briancon Bus (when the matter obviously belongs to administrative law).

  48. 48.

    C.E., avis, ass., 6/11/2002, Syndicat intercommunal des étudiants du second degré du district de l’Haÿ les Roses; T.C., 18/06/2007, Société Brancion bus et Brunet.

  49. 49.

    le Gars (2008), p. 1468.

  50. 50.

    C.E., sect., 11/02/2005, Organisme de gestion du cours du Sacré-cœur (reversing: CE, 12/10/1979, Secrétaire d’Etat aux postes et télécommunications c/Mme Devillers, rec. 375).

  51. 51.

    Pauliat (2010), pp. 39–53.

  52. 52.

    http://www.ratp.fr/en/ratp/r_6177/regulation-of-public-services/.

  53. 53.

    http://www.sncf.com/en/contacts/ombudsman. There is very few information in English on this website.

  54. 54.

    http://www.evenement.sncf.com/sncf.com/mediateur/pdf/mediateur.pdf (2011 annual report only in French).

  55. 55.

    http://www.laposte.fr/mediateurdugroupe/fichePratique.php (only in French).

  56. 56.

    http://www.laposte.fr/mediateurdugroupe/documents/rapports/rapport-mediateur-2011.pdf (2011 report—only in French).

  57. 57.

    http://www.education.gouv.fr/cid3998/faire-appel-mediateur.html.

  58. 58.

    http://www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/var/storage/rapports-publics/124000319/0000.pdf (2011 report—only in French).

  59. 59.

    www.energie-mediateur.fr.

  60. 60.

    Merville (2010), op. cit., pp. 83–87.

  61. 61.

    http://www.paris.fr/mediatrice (only in French).

  62. 62.

    Op. cit., on the EU directive on Mediation and its implementation in French administrative Law (Annex no. 5.83).

  63. 63.

    www.clubdesmediateurs.fr.

  64. 64.

    http://www.oniam.fr/crci/crci//presentation/ (only in French).

  65. 65.

    CE, 6/11/1998, Société Quillery et autres, Req. No. 169884.

  66. 66.

    Decree of 8 December, 2010.

  67. 67.

    Conseil d’Etat, rapport (2009), pp. 279 et seq.

  68. 68.

    http://www.cada.fr/IMG/pdf/rapport2011-2.pdf (2011 report only in French).

  69. 69.

    Bousta (2008), pp. 36–61.

  70. 70.

    Act no. 73–96 of 3 January, 1973 (latest amendment: Act No. 2000-321 of April 12, 2000). Amended in 1976 to introduce the power to propose reforms to Parliament (Act 76-1211 of December 24, 1976, OG, December 28, 1976 at 7493; com. B. Sentolini, RA, 1977 at 117).

  71. 71.

    Michel Poniatowski (Secretary-General of the Independent Republicans) and André Chandernagor. During parliamentary debates (December 14–20, 1972), the motion was defeated. The bill was defended by René Pleven (Minister of Justice), among others.

  72. 72.

    André Legrand sharply criticized the lack of interest shown in the institution and particularly the lack of curiosity on the part of parliamentarians and the French government about experience in other countries. See Legrand (1973), p. 4.

  73. 73.

    Preface to the Thesis of Legrand (1970).

  74. 74.

    le Clainche (1992), p. 561.

  75. 75.

    Legrand, art. cit., note 28, p. 1.

  76. 76.

    Decree no. 2007-1108 of July 18, 2007.

  77. 77.

    Art. 46-1 of the constitutional law of July 23, 2008; Organic Law no. 2011-333 of March 29, 2011; Decision of the Constitutional Council no. 2011-626 DC of March 29, 2011; Ordinary Statute no. 2011-334 of March 29, 2011.

  78. 78.

    Art. 54 of the Spanish Constitution of 1978.

  79. 79.

    Reif (2004), pp. 3 and 8.

  80. 80.

    Giner de Grado (1986), p. 47.

  81. 81.

    Badinter (2008).

  82. 82.

    Goulard (2008).

  83. 83.

    Lavroff (2008), pp. 66 et seq.; Dumat (2009), pp. 4–7.

  84. 84.

    Bousta (2011) (Article available online).

  85. 85.

    Giddings (2000), p. 463.

  86. 86.

    Conseil constitutionnel, décision no. 2011-626 DC, préc., cons. No. 5.

  87. 87.

    On the independence of the Médiateur: C.E., ass, 10 juillet 1981, Retail, rec. 303.

  88. 88.

    Defenseur des Droits (2012), p. 28.

  89. 89.

    Art. 11 of the Organic Law.

  90. 90.

    Recommendations available at http://www.amnesty.fr/var/amnesty/storage/fckeditor/File/sf10f25_01juin2010.pdf.

  91. 91.

    Press release of September 15, 2009: http://www.infomie.net/IMG/pdf/Defenseuredesenfants15.09.09-3.pdf.

  92. 92.

    Wachsmann (2009), pp. 260–268.

  93. 93.

    Defenseur des Droits (2012), pp. 10 and 28.

  94. 94.

    Abdel Hadi (1977), p. 334.

  95. 95.

    Also, if he wishes so, MP filter is still available (art. 7.1 of the organic law).

  96. 96.

    Defenseur des Droits (2012), pp. 9 and 28.

  97. 97.

    Défenseur des Droits (2012), p. 8.

  98. 98.

    Défenseur des Droits (2011), p. 8.

  99. 99.

    Défenseur des Droits (2012), p. 30.

  100. 100.

    Défenseur des Droits (2012), p. 24.

  101. 101.

    Défenseur des Droits (2012), p. 15. It is hard to find out how many complaints have been resolved because the 2011 report is a transition report that accounts of the activity performed before the merging of the four institutions (so when they still worked independently) up to after the appointment of the Défenseur in June 2011.

  102. 102.

    As I already mentioned, the French concept is wider than the EC concept of economic services in the general interest even if the scope of these concepts was reduced by EC case law.

  103. 103.

    CE, ass., 14/02/1996, Maubleu, RFDA 1996, p. 1186 (rights to a hearing).

  104. 104.

    In the light of ECJ, 21/04/1993, aff. C-172/91, Volker Sonntag c/Hans Waidmann; ECJ, 19/01/1994, aff. C-364.72, Eurocontrol.

  105. 105.

    CE, avis no. 366-313, 2003 report, p. 185; CE, 4/02/2004, Leseine et Mme Warnimont, rec. 23.

  106. 106.

    On Mediation in environmental matters: Makowiak (2010), op. cit., pp. 55–65.

  107. 107.

    Chabrot (2007), p. 355.

References

  • Abdel Hadi M (1977) L’extension de l’Ombudsman: triomphe d’une idée ou déformation d’une institution? Int Rev Adm Sci 43(4):334–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Auby J-M (1955) Les recours administratifs. AJDA 117–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Auby J-M (1956) La transaction en matière administrative. AJDA I.1

    Google Scholar 

  • Auby J-M (1997) Les recours administratifs préalables. AJDA 10–15, 10–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Badinter R (2008) SÉNAT. Compte-rendu intégral des débats, séance du 24 juin 2008

    Google Scholar 

  • Belda B (2008) Faut-il généraliser le recours administratifs préalable obligatoire? RDP 6:1483–1511

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell J (2001) French legal cultures. Butterworths, London (coll. Law in context)

    Google Scholar 

  • Boumakani B (2003) La médiation dans la vie administrative. RDP 3:863–888

    Google Scholar 

  • Bousta R (2008) The Ombudsman: proposal for a definition. Int Ombudsman Yearbook 9:36–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Bousta R (2011) Le Défenseur des droits: une apparence trompeuse d’innovation. In: 8th congress of the French Association of Constitutional Law, Nancy, 16–18 June 2011

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyron S (2007) Mediation in administrative law: the search for experimental comparative law. In: Ruffert M (ed) The transformation of administrative law in Europe, vol 4. European Law Publishers, Sellier, pp 283–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Brisson J-F (1996a) Les recours administratifs en droit public français. LGDJ, Paris, pp 7–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Brisson J-F (1996b) Régler autrement les litiges administratifs: Les recours gracieux et hiérarchiques, voie alternative de protection des administrés? RDP 112:793–842

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadiet L (ed) (2005) Médiation et arbitrage. Alternative dispute resolution. Perspectives comparatives. Litec, coll. Procédure, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Chabrot C (2007) La Charte européenne des droits de l’homme dans la ville: un exemple d’acte 855 “préjuridique”. RDP 2:355–377

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapus R (2008) Droit du Contentieux Administratif, 13th edn. Montchrestien, Paris, pp 652–658

    Google Scholar 

  • Chavrier G (2000) Réflexions sur la transaction administrative. RFDA

    Google Scholar 

  • Conseil d’Etat – Etude (1993) Régler autrement les conflits: conciliation, transaction, arbitrage en matière administrative. La documentation française, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Conseil d’Etat – Etude (2008) Les recours administratifs préalables obligatoires. La documentation française, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Conseil d’Etat – Etude (2010) Développer la médiation dans le cadre de l’Union européenne. La documentation française, Paris, 29/07/2010. http://www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/rapports-publics/104000625/index.shtml

  • Conseil d’Etat, rapport (2009) Droit au logement, droit du logement. Documentation française, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Défenseur des Droits (2011) Report. http://www.defenseurdesdroits.fr/sites/default/files/upload/annual-report-synthesis.pdf (in English)

  • Defenseur des Droits (2012) Report. http://www.defenseurdesdroits.fr/sites/default/files/raa-2012-inter/index.htm (only in French)

  • Dumat C (2009) Le défenseur des droits. L P A 212:4–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Erstein L (2012) Le recours administratif préalable obligatoire nouveau. La Semaine Juridique: Administrations et Collectivités territoriales 44, act. 736

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddings P (2000) The future of the Ombudsman. In: Gregory R, Giddings P (eds) Righting wrongs. IOS Press, Amsterdam, IIAS

    Google Scholar 

  • Giner de Grado C (1986) El Defensor del Pueblo en la teoría y en la práctica. Editorial Popular, Madrid

    Google Scholar 

  • Goulard F (2008) Assemblée Nationale. Compte-rendu intégral des débats, séance du 29 mai 2008

    Google Scholar 

  • Guillaume-Hofnung M (2012) La Médiation, 6ème édn. PUF, coll. Que sais-je? Paris. http://www.u-paris2.fr/CEMARC/0/fiche___laboratoire

  • Hourson S (2012) Les recours suspensifs en matière administrative. Droit administratif 5, mai 2012, étude 9

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavroff DG (2008) De l’abus des réformes. R F D C juin 2008, n°hors-série

    Google Scholar 

  • le Clainche M (1992) L’ombudsman, cet inconnu. Revue française d’administration publique, no. 64 (notes), pp 563–566

    Google Scholar 

  • le Gars JM (2008) La conciliation par le judge administrative. L’Actualité Juridique. Droit Administratif (AJDA) 27:1468–1471

    Google Scholar 

  • Legrand A (1970) L’ombudsman scandinave, études comparées sur le contrôle de l’administration. Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Legrand A (1973) Médiateur et ‘Ombudsman’: un problème mal posé. Revue politique et parlementaire 75:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Makowiak J (2010) La spécificité de la médiation en matière d’environnement. In: Tournepiche A-M, Marguenaud J-P (eds) La médiation. Aspects transversaux. Litec, coll. Colloques et Débats, Paris, pp 55–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Merville D (2010) Médiateur national de l’énergie. In: Tournepiche A-M, Marguenaud J-P (eds) La médiation. Aspects transversaux. Litec, coll. Colloques et Débats, Paris, pp 83–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Michel J (1996) Les recours administratifs gracieux, hiérarchiques et de tutelle. La Documentation française, Paris, pp 47–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Moneger F (ed) (2002) La Médiation en débat. Les recherches Pothier, Institut du droit économique et des affaires, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Patrikios A (1997) L’arbitrage en matière administrative, t. 189. LGDJ, coll. Bibliothèque de droit public, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauliat H (2010) Le dévelopement de la médiation dans les services publics. In: Tournepiche A-M, Marguenaud J-P (eds) La médiation. Aspects transversaux. Litec, coll. Colloques et Débats, Paris, pp 39–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Prevedourou E (1996) Les Recours Administratifs Obligatoire: Etude comparée des droits allemand et français. LGDJ, Paris, pp 167–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapp L, Terneyre P (eds) (2002) Lamy Droit public des affaires, no 4139, p 1629

    Google Scholar 

  • Reif L (2004) The Ombudsman, good governance and the international human rights system, vol 79. Martinus Nijhoff/International Studies in Human Rights, Leiden/Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrameck O (2008) Les recours administratifs préalables obligatoires. La documentation française, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Séminaire de Créteil (2000) Nouveaux modes de résolution des conflits de la vie quotidienne. 20–23 Septembre 2000

    Google Scholar 

  • Société de Législation comparée (2008) La Médiation. Dalloz, coll. SLC, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Wachsmann P (2009) Libertés publiques. Dalloz, 6e éd., coll. Cours, Paris, pp 260–268

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lille 2 Droit et Santé University, 59800, Lille, France

    Rhita Bousta

  2. Sciences Po, 27 Rue Saint-Guillaume, 75007, Paris, France

    Arun Sagar

Authors
  1. Rhita Bousta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arun Sagar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rhita Bousta .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Good Governance Studies, Babes Bolyai University, Cluj Napoca, Romania

    Dacian C. Dragos

  2. Center for Good Governance Studies, Babes Bolyai University, Cluj Napoca, Romania

    Bogdana Neamtu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bousta, R., Sagar, A. (2014). Alternative Dispute Resolution in French Administrative Proceedings. In: Dragos, D., Neamtu, B. (eds) Alternative Dispute Resolution in European Administrative Law. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34946-1_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation