A well-developed system of constitutional review is a ‘must-have’ feature of liberal democracies aimed at realizing constitutional justice and human rights protection. In Europe, constitutional review mechanisms have now developed to be part of a multilevel system of rights protection involving the domestic judiciary, including the constitutional court, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). France is generally categorised in the European continental model of constitutional review of legislation operated by a specialised court. Yet, the French system has very much stood apart in this regard, on a tradition of Legicentrisme and a fear of government by judges. There was, as for other things, an ‘Exception Francaise’ featuring a system with, originally, no proper constitutional court and, up until recently, a weak form of constitutional review. The protection of rights offered a combination of ex ante abstract constitutional review of legislation operated by the Constitutional Council (CC) against the provisions of the Constitution, and the subsequently developed conventional review performed by ordinary judges against rights contained in international and European conventions, including the ECHR. This has changed with the introduction of ex post concrete constitutional review in 2008. The Priority Question on Constitutionality (PQC) is a new constitutional remedy which allows individuals to challenge laws already in force that infringe their constitutional rights and freedoms before ordinary courts in the course of proceedings. Subject to a filtering mechanism involving the two highest courts (the Council of State, the supreme administrative court, and the Court of Cassation, the supreme judicial court), the issue on constitutionality is decided by the CC under Article 61-1 of the 1958 Constitution: ‘If, during proceedings in progress before a court of law, it is claimed that a legislative provision infringes the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, the matter may be referred by the Conseil d'Etat or by the Cour de Cassation to the Constitutional Council which shall rule within a determined period’. Entered into force in March 2010, its three years of operations reveal a ‘French legal success story’. With nearly 280 PQC decisions rendered by the CC, the new review has solidly and rapidly established itself in domestic constitutional law. It has also been a qualitative success. The PQC has affected all areas of law, with the most significant activity in tax and criminal law. Significant rulings have enhanced the protection of rights and provoked changes in the legislation on, for examples, police custody, involuntary confinement and sexual harassment. The introduction of ex post review has profoundly modified the tenets of constitutional review. It represents a landmark in further development of constitutionalisation and in the achievement of constitutionalism in France. It has helped to ingrain the Constitution politically, civically and, of course, judicially. The French system of rights-based constitutional review is heading towards completeness and convergence with the dominant European model of constitutional review addressing the requirements of modern democracy. Yet, the PQC had to ‘fit in’ an already settled and complex domestic courts system and, as outlined above, a singular scheme of rights adjudication involving review of constitutionality and review of conventionality. Various issues arose at drafting stage and in the first years of operation posing interesting challenges in terms of constitutional justice and governance. The study is divided into two main parts about the evolution of the model of constitutional review, on one hand, and the practice and endurance of the new form of constitutional review, on the other hand. The first part aims at explaining the original form of constitutional review and its development with emphasis on the PQC. The second part examines specific issues raised by the new mechanism from an institutional perspective, in particular the changing role of the CC and its relationship with other courts, domestic and European, as well as with the legislator. The aim of the study is to provide a better understanding of the French system of right-based constitutional review in light of most recent developments The methodology adopted is not comparative per se, although specific comparisons will be made with relevant European systems. Also, the approach will focus on institutional aspects rather than on the substance of rights.