FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Thierry Laloum, Jordan Pontal, Julie Sarny and Gabin Dupont-Guianvarch, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
reviews both the merits of the administrative act and the manner in which it was made. The judge’s review focuses solely on the legality of the administrative act (and not on its appro - priateness). In this context, it is customary to distinguish between two legal grounds for illegality: • internal legality (merits) – the judge reviews the merits of the administrative act, which allows for the sanctioning of any direct viola - tion of the law. This includes reviewing the legal and factual grounds for the act as well as its objectives, which may lead to a finding of misuse of power; and • external legality – the judge assesses whether the administrative act complies with the appli - cable rules regarding jurisdiction, form, and procedure. 10.2 Constitutional Challenge France has a written Constitution dating from 4 October 1958. Pursuant to the hierarchy of norms, administra - tive acts must comply with the Constitution and are therefore subject to constitutional control by a judge who is, in principle, an administrative judge. If it appears that an administrative act does not comply with the Constitution, the judge will annul the challenged administrative act. Moreover, as part of a litigation before the administrative judge, claimants can also invoke the non-compliance of a law with the Consti - tution through the question of constitutionality, which can be submitted to the Constitutional Council upon a referral decision by the Council of State (see 3.1 Challenging Primary Legisla- tion above).
Additionally, the Constitutional Council has rec - ognised its jurisdiction to assess the constitu - tionality of administrative acts, particularly in the context of electoral disputes. 10.3 Procedural Errors Claimants may challenge an administrative act on the grounds that the procedure for its adop - tion was not properly followed. In such cases, claimants must lodge an ultra vires action before the administrative judge, arguing that a procedural error exists on the grounds of external legality (see 10.1 Scope of Judicial Review: Merits v Process ). For this argument to succeed, however, the procedural error must be sufficiently serious to have influenced the administrative act or to have deprived the affected parties of a legal guaran - tee (Council of State, 23 December 2011, Dan - Claimants may lodge an ultra vires action before the administrative judge when the administrative authority has made a factual error in justifying its decision. This factual error encompasses two distinct sce - narios. • Material inaccuracy of facts – the material inaccuracy of facts occurs when the admin - istrative act is based on a fact that is materi - ally inaccurate, meaning the fact either does not exist, has disappeared, or has not yet occurred (Council of State, 14 January 1916, Camino, case No 59619). • Error in the legal qualification of facts – the error in the legal qualification of facts occurs when the facts at hand do not properly justify thony, case No 335033). 10.4 Factual Errors
115 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook