The relationship between criminal proceedings and the role of the “juge du contrôle” (court supervising arbitral proceedings) raises a number of questions. One must first identify which is the “juge du contrôle”. This will principally be the jurisdiction dealing with annulment (or an appeal against an enforcement order). Exceptionally, the state courts may also be seised of an application for revision of an award (in domestic arbitration, if the members of the arbitral tribunal can no longer deliberate together). One must thereafter determine the constraints which criminal proceedings impose on the supervising judge. There is no constraint in relation to the rule whereby criminal proceedings suspend civil actions by reason of the optional nature thereof. However the rule whereby criminal proceedings take precedence over civil actions, subject to certain conditions, may act as a constraint. One must then determine the influence which criminal proceedings may have on the oversight exercised by the “juge du contrôle”. Criminal proceedings and criminal law may thus form part of the grounds for oversight, principally incompatibility with public policy. The key question finally is the influence which the potential or proven commission of a criminal offence may have over the review of the award. The existence of a criminal offence is thus a significant clue for determining a breach of public policy.