Jurisdictional Dualism and the Resolution of Jurisdictional Conflicts by French Courts

The Role of the Court of Jurisdictional Conflicts in Ensuring Judicial Balance and Compliance with Article 6 of the ECHR

Abstract

This article aims to analyze the role of the Court of Conflicts in ensuring French jurisdictional balance and compliance with Article 6 of the ECHR through descriptive-analytical and legal-dogmatic methods. First, it addresses the structure and jurisdiction of the Judicial Order. Next, it outlines the structure and jurisdiction of the Administrative Order. It then analyzes the mission of the Court of Conflicts in resolving conflicts of jurisdiction. It subsequently explores the role of this jurisdiction in preventing jurisdictional disputes. The study found that, due to the existence of jurisdictional dualism in France, disputes over the attribution of jurisdiction between the Administrative and Judicial Orders may arise. It also noted the existence of the preliminary ruling as a mechanism for resolving disputes over jurisdiction between courts. However, it was found that the Court of Conflicts plays an essential role in resolving conflicts of jurisdiction between the Judicial and Administrative Orders. It was also noted that the resolution of conflicts of jurisdiction by the Court of Conflicts is an essential tool for ensuring balance between the jurisdictions of the judicial and administrative orders. It was further concluded that the role of the Court of Conflicts in resolving and preventing conflicts of jurisdiction is indispensable to ensure that each jurisdiction acts within its limits, avoiding conflicting judicial decisions and excessive length of proceedings, favoring procedural speed, and the right of every person to have their case examined by an independent judge, in accordance with the provisions of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.