Paris (AFP)

Condemned to repay the millions collected in 2008 but relaxed Tuesday by the Criminal Court: the two decisions rendered, civil and then criminal, in the arbitration that benefited Bernard Tapie, are diametrically opposed. But are they inconsistent?

Question: Why did justice first pronounce itself in civil matters?

Answer: In the sprawling case of the Tapie arbitration, supposed to settle an old dispute between the businessman and the Credit Lyonnais related to the resale of Adidas in the 1990s, the civil justice made two decisions in 2015, definitive while the criminal trial was opened.

Seizure of an appeal for review by the Consortium de réalisation (CDR) - the body responsible for managing the legacy of the former public bank - the Paris Court of Appeal first quashed the arbitration for "fraud ", then condemned Bernard Tapie to return the 403 million euros granted in 2008.

The Paris Criminal Court found that nothing proved a "scam" during the arbitration and relaxed Tuesday Bernard Tapie, the CEO of Orange Stéphane Richard and four other defendants.

The only person convicted at the moment is the former Minister of Economy Christine Lagarde. She had been convicted in late 2016 of "negligence" for failing to appeal against the arbitral award, but the Court of Justice of the Republic (RGC) had exempted her from punishment.

"There is no consistency, strictly no" between all these decisions, said Hervé Temime, one of Bernard Tapie's lawyers.

For him, "it is an anomaly that is due to the fact that the civil court believed to be able to base a decision on the analysis of partial parts of the criminal file and without debate, before any judgment of a criminal court".

"Normally, the criminal keeps the civil in state.It is always better to judge a criminal case before the civil because the criteria are stricter," says Denis Chemla, a lawyer in business law who has defended the Swiss bank UBS.

However, "the criminal judge is not tied and can re-read the case," he notes. Since the civil and criminal courts answer different questions, the decisions rendered are "not necessarily contradictory".

"There may be an annulment of the civil arbitration because there is a hint of partiality of an arbitrator.In the criminal, it is necessary to prove the fraudulent maneuvers, the deception, the connivance? These are two different levels" says Chemla.

Q: Are remedies possible?

A: The Paris prosecutor's office, which had requested the conviction of five of the six defendants at the criminal trial and asked for five years in prison against Bernard Tapie, has not yet said whether he would appeal. He has ten days to do it.

Moreover, Bernard Tapie being exonerated criminally for having committed "fraudulent maneuvers", is he entitled to request a review of the decision annulling the civil arbitration?

"Impossible" ensures the lawyer of CDR Benoît Chabert. "We can not ask for a revision of a revision".

"As long as the criminal decision is not final, the question does not arise," says Julia Minkowski, who also defends Bernard Tapie.

Q: What other procedures are in progress?

A: The Tapie-Crédit Lyonnais file is far from closed.

Sentenced to civil life, the businessman who has been in personal bankruptcy since December 1994 must always repay the sums collected during the arbitration.

After the rejection of two plans of reimbursement, the Commercial Court of Bobigny must examine October 30 a request for judicial liquidation of companies of the businessman.

This procedure was disoriented outside Paris at the request of Bernard Tapie because a judicial investigation for "fraud at trial" was opened by the Paris prosecutor and is a decision favorable to the businessman on his first repayment plan.

Other commercial procedures are in progress in Great Britain or Belgium and Bernard Tapie has also filed a "complaint of infringement" against France before the European Commission for non-compliance with the rules of competition law during the transfer of Adidas.

? 2019 AFP