ECHR and the right to access bank account information: still no request for an opinion
Following the Paris Administrative Court, which had issued a questionable ruling regarding the compliance of the rules governing the disclosure of bank account information with Article 8 of the ECHR, the Marseille Administrative Court of Appeal has now taken the same approach.
In this particular case, a taxpayer who believed himself to be a French tax resident was subject to a tax audit during whichadministration requested that banks provide his bank statements.
Since the tax audit resulted in an assessment, the assessment was challenged all the way to the Administrative Court of Appeals.
The taxpayer then argued before the court that the communication fees were unlawful under Article 8 of the ECHR and in violation of the right to privacy. The argument appeared to be largely inspired by the ECHR’s decision of January 8 of this year regarding Italian legislation (ECHR, Jan. 8, 2026, Nos. 40607/19 and 34583/20).
As a reminder, the Court ruled that Italian legislation was contrary to Article 8. The legislation did not establish a binding framework foradministration officialsadministration request the disclosure of bank accounts. Furthermore, taxpayers did not have an effective remedy to challenge these disclosure rights. The Court expressly ruled that the existence of an appeal in the event of a tax assessment did not constitute an effective remedy.
The Administrative Court of Appeal then cited the provisions governing the right of access to information and stated that "the ability to request bank statements from financial institutions […] has been established in case law since 1982. These statutory provisions limit the discretionary power ofadministration , which cannot be regarded as being exercised without restriction."
It will also hold that the taxpayer has an effective remedy because he or she has the option of challenging the right to disclose information as part of the appeal challenging the tax assessment.
The court’s inadequate reasoning—which is particularly at odds with the ECHR’s ruling regarding the definition of an effective remedy—will likely leave many readers pondering.
At a time when legal scholars and public rapporteurs alike are pointing out the similarities between the Italian and French systems of communication rights and the serious risk of non-compliance with the ECHR, one might wonder why courts are issuing this type of decision rather than requesting an advisory opinion from Conseil d'Etat.
CAA Marseille, May 7, 2026, No. 24MA02621
This legal watch produced by Mispelon Avocat, a law firm specializing in French tax audit and French tax litigation. You can follow this legal watch subscribing to the newsletter via this link.