La négociation collective est une pratique apparue, en France, à l’aube du XXe siècle. Elle compense au niveau collectif le déséquilibre entre employeur et salarié inhérent à tout contrat de travail individuel. L’essor de la pratique conventionnelle a conduit le législateur à élaborer un véritable droit de la négociation collective tendant à l’amélioration des conditions de vie et de travail des salariés.Depuis 1982, la négociation collective a également pour finalité l’amélioration de l’organisation de l’entreprise et des relations de travail. Les accords collectifs organisationnels défendent des intérêts plus généraux tels que l’intérêt de l’entreprise ou de la société et non plus uniquement l’intérêt catégoriel des salariés. Ils peuvent ainsi créer des obligations à la charge des salariés ou contenir des dispositions qui leurs sont moins favorables.Pour permettre aux accords organisationnels de développer pleinement leurs effets, le législateur a réformé les règles protectrices des salariés et autorisé les accords collectifs – notamment d’entreprise – à déroger, dans un sens moins favorable, à la loi ou à un accord supérieur.Cette étude a pour objet de démontrer qu’une autre voie était possible. En effet, la consécration des accords organisationnels pouvait se réaliser sans porter atteinte aux règles protectrices des salariés, traditionnellement inhérentes au droit du travail. Néanmoins, le caractère potentiellement dérogatoire ou « donnant-donnant » des accords organisationnels obligeait à réformer les règles relatives à leur légitimité. / As the 20th century dawned in France collective bargaining emerged as a new practice. At mass-level it compensates the inequality between an employer and an employee in the power relationship which stems from any individual employment contract.Following the development of that conventional practice lawmakers have established a new field of lawconcerning collective bargaining which aims at improving the working and living conditions of salaried workers.Since 1982, the aim of collective bargaining has been extended to cover the improvement of organization andrelations on the workplace. Organizational collective agreements have come to defend (more) general interestssuch as the interest of a given company or of society and not only the interests of the different categories of salaried workers. These agreements can thus create duties for the employees or contain clauses witch are less favourable to them.In order for the organizational agreements to be fully effective law-makers have reformed the regulations which govern the protection of employees and in some cases even approved collective agreements -namely company agreements- which depart from the law or higher level agreement, and become less favourable.This study will demonstrate that it was possible to act differently.Indeed organizational agreements could have existed without infringing the protection of worker’s rights, such asit is required by labour law. Nevertheless, the potentially less favourable character or quid pro quo principle of organizational agreements required reforming the rules relating their legitimacy

O presente trabalho visa a estudar a regulamentação existente a respeito da relação de substituição de ações em operações de incorporação de sociedades e incorporação de ações. Para tanto, serão abordados os dispositivos legais, as posições doutrinárias e as interpretações da jurisprudência sobre o assunto no Brasil e em Direito Comparado. No primeiro capítulo, são estudados os institutos da incorporação e da incorporação de ações, analisando-se a natureza jurídica dessas operações e os procedimentos para realização de cada uma delas. No segundo capítulo, examina-se propriamente a relação de substituição de ações e sua natureza jurídica para, na sequência, analisarmos o arcabouço legal em que se insere a determinação da relação de troca de ações. Nesse contexto, são abordados os critérios, parâmetros e requisitos que norteiam a sua definição, bem como os mecanismos legais previstos pela legislação societária para compor os diferentes interesses envolvidos, notadamente aqueles dos acionistas minoritários e do controlador. O terceiro capítulo analisa algumas especificidades relativas às operações de incorporação que envolvem companhias abertas, operações de incorporação englobando sociedades sob controle comum, diferentes relações de substituição de ações entre ações de diferentes espécies e classes e, por fim, entre ações da mesma espécie e classe. Finalmente, a conclusão arremata as principais ideias discutidas ao longo deste trabalho. / This paper aims at analyzing the existing regulation regarding the share exchange ratio in mergers and merger of shares (incorporação de ações). For this purpose, this work will examine the legal provisions, the different doctrinal positions and case law understandings relating to this matter under Brazilian Law and Comparative Law. The first chapter of this paper presents the concepts of the merger and merger of shares and analyzes the nature of such transactions and the procedures necessary for their performance. The second chapter examines the share exchange ratio and its nature, followed by an analysis of the legal environment in which such share exchange ratio is determined. In this sense, this paper analyzes the criteria, parameters and requirements that drive the determination of the share exchange ratio, as well as the legal provisions established by Corporate Law to assure that all interests involved in such transactions are addressed, mainly those of minority shareholders as opposed to those of the controlling shareholders. The third chapter analyzes certain special situations concerning mergers and mergers of shares that involve publicly held corporations or corporations under common control. This chapter also analyzes special cases regarding the establishment of different share exchange ratios between different types and classes of shares and between shares of the same type and class. Finally, the conclusion of this work summarizes the main ideas discussed herein.

Même si le secret des affaires semble être un concept déjà connu s’inscrivant dans le temps long de l’histoire, l’intérêt qu’on lui porte doit être, plus que jamais renouvelé eu égard à l’importance de l’information, c’est-à-dire l’avantage concurrentiel qu’il procure dans l’économie moderne. Autrement dit, il s’agit de l’ériger sinon de le conforter en tant que notion juridique à part entière. Cet objectif impose de rechercher une légitimité à la pratique du secret des affaires à l’époque de la transparence. Une fois celle-là établie, il faut alors en asseoir l’effectivité. Nombre de techniques juridiques pourront être sollicitées mais une attention particulière doit être portée aux contentieux. Ceux-ci sont un facteur de risque pour la protection du secret des affaires. En tous les cas, une loi spéciale se justifie afin d’assurer une plus grande prévisibilité de ladite protection. Sous tous ces aspects, l’approche comparative est pertinente car si le droit français et le droit malgache ont une proximité évidente, les solutions ne sont pas forcément les mêmes. / Even if trade secrets seem to be a well-known concept since it has been practiced throughout history, because of the great value of the information in the modern economy i.e., a competitive edge that it provides, we have to, now more than ever, renew all the interests on this topic. In other words, it has to be recognized as a full legal concept. In order to achieve this aim, we have to find out what makes trade secret practicing legitimate while transparency is the rule. Then, the effectiveness of legal protection of trade secrets must be insured. Numerous provisions may offer protection to the trade secrets but, special attention must be paid on litigations. Indeed, trade secrets are at risk to be disclosed during the legal proceedings. In any case, specific trade secrets act is relevant to ensure a necessary foreseeability of the protection of trade secrets. In all these aspects, a comparative approach between the French law and Malagasy law is relevant. In fact, even if there is an obvious proximity between the two systems, solutions are not necessarily the same.

The aim of the works was analyze possible to sources financial resources for financing immovables in Czech republic. Sources were to be surveyed for needs personal living and needs business. In diploma work work are circumscribed individual possibilities, their criteria and their usage. Thesis is tipped modelling situation and her solving.

Séculaire, le débat autour de la notion d’intérêt de l’entreprise est loin de s’éteindre. Les questions qui entourent sa définition, son appréhension et les frontières de son effectivité continuent de nourrir les réflexions de tous ceux qui s’intéressent au droit de la relation du travail, au droit de l’entreprise. Paradigme, boussole ou jauge des comportements et décisions de gestion, l’intérêt de l’entreprise apparaît comme une notion « caméléon ». De source jurisprudentielle, l’intérêt de l’entreprise n’est pas moins une notion au centre de toutes les réformes touchant, non seulement, à l’amélioration des rapports de « collaboration » des parties à la relation de travail, mais à l’indispensable coopération entre tous ceux qui prennent part à l’exploitation des activités économiques « investisseurs, salariés, clients, fournisseurs, fonctionnaires, analystes financiers, associations professionnelles, État ». Visant à assainir tous les montages stratégiques et managériaux dans l’optique d’une compétitivité réelle de l’entreprise, la notion ne contribue pas moins à la protection de la dignité du salarié au travers la garantie d’un travail décent. Ainsi, tous ceux qui concourent au fonctionnement de l’entreprise doivent agir dans le sens de l’intérêt de l’entreprise, dans la réalisation du « projet collectif ». La notion se trouve ainsi au centre d’une articulation entre « l’individuel » et le « collectif ». D’implantation récente en droit français, la notion l’est relativement dans l’espace OHADA et très peu en droit béninois / Secular, the debate around the concept of interest of the company is far from dying out. The questions surrounding its definition, its apprehension and the limits of its effectiveness continue to feed the reflections of all those who are interested in the law of the labor relation, the right of the company. Paradigm, compass or gauge of behavior and management decisions, the interest of the company appears as a notion "chameleon". From a jurisprudential source, the interest of the company is no less a central notion of all the reforms affecting not only the improvement of the "collaboration" relations of the parties to the employment relationship, but also the essential cooperation between all those who take part in the exploitation of economic activities "investors, employees, customers, suppliers, civil servants, financial analysts, professional associations, the State". Aiming to clean up all the strategic and managerial mounts with a view to a real competitiveness of the company, the notion contributes not less to the protection of the dignity of the employee through the guarantee of decent work. Thus, all those who contribute to the operation of the company must act in the interest of the company, in the realization of the "collective project". The notion is thus at the center of an articulation between "the individual" and the "collective". Recently established in French law, the concept is relatively in the OHADA space and very little in Benin law