Recent French Administrative Reforms
| Author | Brian Chapman |
| Published date | 01 June 1954 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1954.tb01309.x |
| Date | 01 June 1954 |
Recent
French
Administrative
Reforms
By
BRIAN
CHAPMAN
This
note
deals
with
recent
changes
in
the
system
of
Administrative
Courts
and
with
the
authority
of
the Prefect
over
orher
State
@Yi&als
in
his
area.
MONG
the series
of
decrees passed by
M.
Laniel’s government last summer
A
two were
of
great importance. The first was the reform
of
the jurisdiction
of
the administrative courts
;
the second was designed to revert
to
the pre-war
pattern
of
local government in which the Prefect was the sole, unchallenged
government authority in the Department.
Both
these measures will have
to b: taken into account in any future work
of
value on French government.
Reform
of
the Jurisdiction of the Administrative Courts
The first reform tackled a long-standing problem which has threatened
the efficacity and even the authority
of
the administrative courts.
It
concerned
the jurisdiction
of
the two levels
of
administrative courts in France, the
Conseils de Prdfecture Znterddportementaux
and the
Cmseil d’Etat.
Until
the new decrees were passed the
Conseds
de Prqecture
(the lower courts)
had only a restricted competence
:
unless a specific legal
text
provided
otherwise, the
Conseil d’Etat
was the competent court. The latter was in
technical language the
juge
de droit ccmmun en mutikre administrative,
and
this meant that in addition to its duties as the administrative court
of
appeal,
it had to act as the
court
of
first instance in
all
cases not directly assigned
by
law to the jurisdiction
of
the
Conseils de Prdfecture.
This
principle dated from the creation
of
the administrative courts by
Napoleon and had, over the course
of
time, led to an extremely complicated
situation. By 1953 questions concerning the powers
of
administraLive
authorities or the legality
of
administrative actions were normally dealt with
by he
Conseil
d’Etat
directly, as were many classes
of
actions for damages
against public authorities and litigation involving the status and rights
of
fonciionnaires.
On
the other hand, the
Conseils de Prdfecture
were empowered
to deal with claims
for
damages arising out of public works contracts, and
with litigation between local authorities and their
own
officials. They also
dealt with most affairs concerning the powers, operations and election of local
authorities, but there was
no
clear line between what they could handle
and what they could not. The growth in the number
of
public authorities
and the influence
of
executive action upon the citizen as a result
of
post-war
legislation led inevitably to a great increase in administrative litigation, much
of which had to go directly to the
Consezl d’Etat.
The result was that the
judidal section
of
the
Cunseil d’Etat
was subjected to an intolerable pressure
of
work, and the number of cases awaiting judgment rose every year
at
a
higher rate than the number
it
had been able to decide. In 1947 there was
already a backlog of
15,000
cases
awaiting decision
;
in
1949
this was 19,000,
21
1
To continue reading
Request your trial