FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Thierry Laloum, Jordan Pontal, Julie Sarny and Gabin Dupont-Guianvarch, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
in treatment must be proportionate to the differ - ences in their situations. However, the principle of equality does not pre - vent identical treatment for natural persons or legal entities in de jure or de facto different situ - ations, nor does it preclude discrimination that is proportionate to objective differences, such as domicile or residence. Claimants may challenge an administrative act that does not comply with the principle of equal - ity as defined above. Should the administrative judge find that the challenged administrative act does not comply with such a principle, the judge will annul the administrative act. 10.8 Human Rights On 3 May 1974 France ratified the European Convention on Human Rights. As a member of the European Union, France is also subject to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Euro - pean Union solemnly proclaimed on 7 December 2000. Natural persons and legal entities may chal - lenge the legality of any administrative act before administrative courts on the grounds that it is non-compliant – or that the law on which it is based is non-compliant – with one or more of the rights guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights or by the Charter of Funda - mental Rights of the European Union (provided that, in the latter case, the purpose of the chal - lenged administrative act is to implement Euro - pean Union Law). Should such an appeal be lodged, the admin - istrative court will annul the administrative act that is non-compliant with the European Con - vention on Human Rights or with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and
disregard any legislative provision that is not compliant with this text. 10.9 Proportionality Claimants may bring an ultra vires action before the administrative judge against an administra - tive act that violates the principle of proportion - ality. In this context, claimants must invoke an error in the legal classification of the facts, which forms part of the internal legality of the administrative act (see 10.1 Scope of Judicial Review: Merits v Process ). The administrative judge’s review of the legal classification of facts can occur in various fields, but with different levels of intensity. In some are - as, the review is limited, focusing only on mani - fest errors of assessment. It is only in certain areas that a full review of the proportionality of an administrative act is con - ducted. For example, in matters of administra - tive police, administrative acts must fully comply with the principle of proportionality (Council of State, 19 May 1933, Benjamin, Lebon p. 541). Administrative police acts must therefore be appropriate, necessary, and proportionate. As a result of this proportionality test, acts that excessively infringe upon protected rights and freedoms are annulled. 10.10Additional Grounds In addition to the previously mentioned defects of illegality, three other grounds of illegality may lead to the annulment of administrative acts. • Misuse of powers this occurs when an admin - istrative authority exercises its powers for a purpose other than the one for which they were granted. This typically happens when a
117 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook