Dinner in honour of Isabelle de Silva, President of the Autorité de la concurrence

Dinner organised by Concurrences Review with keynote speaker Isabelle de Silva (President, French Competition Authority) in partnership with White & Case and Compass Lexecon.

Yann Utzschneider

It will briefly mention the institutional and procedural developments to come, resulting from the ECN + Directive and the PACTE law under discussion. There are very clearly a number of elements in the expected changes that are heading in the right direction. First of all, the power of discretionary prosecution enshrined in the provisions of the PACTE Act, allowing the Authority to reject certain referrals that may be handled by the Ministry of the Economy. The spirit of the text seems to allow the Authority to focus on the most serious offences. It also extends the scope of the simplified procedure. Furthermore, the leniency procedure will be simplified with the deletion of the notice which should make it possible to better assess the leniency applicant’s actual contribution to the investigation. This procedure raised a number of difficulties, in particular in the context of leniency proceedings initiated following visits and seizures. There is then a question mark with the possibility for the Authority to take up ex officio the matter of provisional measures. It would be interesting to know more about the use that the Authority wishes to make of this new power and why the digital sector is particularly concerned. Finally, there is a point of concern with the return of the fadettes. The text in fact allows the Authority, like the AMF, to obtain fadettes (itemised bills) which provide certain information including the number of calls and the identity of the recipients, the location of the user and the identity of the terminal used. To do this, the Authority will have to make an access request before a connection data request controller. As a reminder, the possibility of accessing these documents had been censured by the Constitutional Council in 2015, which had noted that the power to obtain communication of the fadettes was not accompanied by sufficient guarantees. Practitioners also wondered about the real scope of the text, since the legislature referred to numerous ordinances that would have to be adopted at a later date.

Photos © Léo-Paul Ridet

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.



  • French Competition Authority (Paris)
  • White & Case (Paris)
  • Compass Lexecon (Paris)