Abstract
The contribution to the financial markets regulation by various actors such as the Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF), the European institutions or the judicial judge has been the subject of significant work. However, the administrative court did not receive the same honours. In addition, in the context of litigation over the regulation of financial markets, the competence of the Conseil d’État has been criticized rather than welcomed. Indeed, some have argued that the difficulties resulting from the dualism of jurisdiction in financial matters would justify the abolition of the competence of the administrative order. The unique jurisdiction of the judiciary to hear individual decisions of the AMF, such as sanctions, is presented as a remedy for the complexity of financial regulation litigation. So much so that one is led to wonder whether the presence of the administrative judge in this matter is really essential. In other words, the question arises as to whether the Conseil d’État is necessary for the regulation of financial markets. The aim of this thesis is to provide a resolutely affirmative answer.Since the creation of the AMF, the jurisdiction of the administrative judge of first and last instance has been significantly extended. The latter is now competent to hear appeals against individual decisions taken against market professionals. Administrative case law is also a significant source of enrichment in financial regulation law. Indeed, both the procedural guarantees and the substantive rules, which govern the AMF's power to impose sanctions, have been consolidated by the administrative judge. Thus, the Conseil d’État has asserted itself as a key player in the regulation of financial markets.