Le financement de l’économie sociale et solidaire (ESS) se trouve actuellement au centre des préoccupations des acteurs et des observateurs de celle-ci. La question de savoir comment le droit peut faciliter le financement des entreprises de l’ESS mérite donc qu’on y consacre une analyse systémique. Le cadre juridique du financement de l’ESS est posé par les normes impératives en droit des sociétés et des groupements de l’ESS. La loi n°2014-856 du 31 juillet 2014 relative à l'ESS dresse une liste limitative des formes juridiques appartenant à l’ESS : associations loi 1901, fondations, coopératives, mutuelles et sociétés commerciales sous certaines conditions. Afin de discuter les normes impératives ayant un impact sur le financement des entreprises de l’ESS, la première partie de cette thèse reconstitue l’offre éparse de statuts et leur régime juridique. En découle, dans la seconde partie, une critique ordonnée de l’accès aux ressources financières, selon qu’elles sont destinées aux organisations sans but lucratif (OSBL) ou aux sociétés, libérales ou avec une contrepartie, qu’elles soient le fruit d’un investissement ou qu’elles proviennent d’une des parties prenantes. Cette thèse aboutit à cinq séries de propositions de réformes : la redéfinition de l’ESS pour un fléchage plus affûté des ressources financières dédiées ; la révision des normes impératives entravant la performance financière des OSBL ; la stimulation de l’investissement dans l’ESS ; la sécurisation des ressources des entreprises de l’ESS au moyen de l’évaluation de l'impact social ; la pérennisation des aides d’État, eu égard à l’utilité sociale, et des compensations pour obligation de service public / Nowadays the financing of the social and solidarity economy (SSE) lies at the forefront of the concerns plaguing operators and observers in the sector. Therefore, how can SSE financing be eased by law is an issue that deserves a systemic analysis. The legal framework for SSE financing has been set by peremptory norms of SSE corporate law. French act n°2014-856 of 31 July 2014 on the SSE establishes a restrictive list of legal forms that automatically belong to the SSE: non-profit organisations, foundations, cooperatives, mutual societies and commercial companies under certain conditions. With a view to discussing the peremptory norms which affect the financing of social enterprises, the first section of this thesis gives an overview of the SSE statutes and their scattered legal regime. As a result, the second section provides a sorted review of the access to financial resources, whether they are intended for not-for-profit or for-profit organisations, with or without consideration, and whether they stem from an investment or are provided by a stakeholder. This thesis leads to five series of reform proposals: redefining the SSE for a better earmarking of the dedicated financial resources; revising the peremptory norms that hinder the financial performance of not-for-profit organisations; stimulating investments in the SSE; securing the resources for social enterprises through the assessment of their social impact; perpetuating both state aid regarding social utility and compensations for public service obligations

Les juges sont devenus des acteurs omniprésents au sein des sociétés. Garants de l’application du droit, leurs nombreuses interventions contribuent au bon fonctionnement des sociétés. L’étude des interventions judiciaires spécifiques au droit des sociétés in bonis permet de souligner le rôle majeur désormais tenu par les juges. L’analyse des pouvoirs judiciaires de régulation de la vie sociétaire et de sanction des obligations civiles en droit des sociétés met en évidence l’impact des interventions judiciaires sur le fonctionnement des sociétés. Il existe de nombreuses procédures spécifiques au droit des sociétés, mais la richesse des solutions et des innovations jurisprudentielles caractérise également le recours nécessaire au droit civil et au droit processuel afin de répondre aux exigences de l’environnement sociétaire. Fort de ce constat, différentes pistes peuvent être proposées dans le but de renforcer l’efficacité et l’utilité de ces interventions judiciaires qui permettent de garantir l’efficience et l’attractivité du droit des sociétés français. / Judges have become ubiquitous stakeholders within companies. As guardians of law, they play a real role in the well being of companies. The study of legal interventions, specific to corporate law, applied to “in bonis” companies clearly highlights the major role played by judges today. Analysis of the judiciary powers regulating companies lives and of the sanctions surrounding liabilities in corporate law puts emphasis on the impact of judicial involvement on company functioning. Many specific corporate law proceedings exist, however, the rich range in solutions and case-law innovations accentuates the need to resort to civil and procedural law in response to the business world’s requirements and expectations. With this in mind, different lines of action are imaginable in the hope to reinforce the usefulness and relevance of judicial involvement that guarantee the efficiency and attractive nature of French corporate law.

À l’heure actuelle, le droit du cautionnement est une matière totalement désagrégée. Cet éclatement du droit du cautionnement provient essentiellement de l’abondance et de la superposition des textes : on ne compte plus les multiples interventions du législateur, ni les rebondissements jurisprudentiels. La matière aurait pu être simplifiée si elle avait bénéficié de la réforme du droit des sûretés avec l’ordonnance du 23 mars 2006. Mais il n’en est rien.Associée au droit des sociétés, cette matière en devient d’autant plus complexe. En droit des sociétés, le cautionnement est une garantie des plus répandues. Il constitue la plupart du temps, pour la société, un acte dangereux car il peut avoir des conséquences préjudiciables pour celle-Ci. En même temps, la réglementation doit garder une certaine souplesse afin de respecter les exigences de rapidité de la vie des affaires. Cette conciliation est délicate à réaliser.Cette étude se propose d’appréhender le lien existant entre le cautionnement et les règles du droit des sociétés. Pour mener à bien cette entreprise, il convenait d’envisager le sujet sous deux angles, à savoir d’une part le cautionnement donné par une société, et d’autre part, celui consenti au profit d’une personne morale.Un tel cautionnement qu’il soit donné par une société, ou en sa faveur, est de nature à soulever des difficultés au regard des principes gouvernant le droit des sociétés. C’est pourquoi, certaines règles ont été fixées. Le cautionnement se trouve ainsi gouverné par des règles de droit des sociétés spécifiques, au-Delà des règles de droit commun qui le régissent. Mais cela passe également par l’exploitation du formalisme supposé protéger la caution personne physique, les obligations du créancier telles que l’obligation d’information, de mise en garde, le principe de proportionnalité…Si la loi Dutreil a échoué dans son impératif de cohésion et de simplification du droit du cautionnement, peut-On dire que l’avenir est à une unification des différentes législations relatives au cautionnement ? / At present, surety law is a matter that has totally been breaking apart. This fragmentation of surety law is mainly due to the abundance and overlapping of legislative acts: there are more interventions on the part of the legislator, more jurisprudential developments than we can count. The matter could have be simplified, had it benefited from the reform of security law in accordance with the order of 23 March 2006. But that was not the case.In relation to corporate law, the subject is becoming even more complex. In corporate law, surety is the most widespread guarantee. To a company it represents, most of the time, an unsafe act because it may suffer adverse consequences from it. At the same time, regulation should retain some flexibility to meet the speed requirements of the business world. This is a delicate balance to achieve.This study aims at grasping the relationship between surety and the rules of corporate law. To carry out this undertaking, it was appropriate to consider the subject from two different angles, namely the surety bond as it is issued by a company, and that as granted for the benefit of a legal person.Such guarantee whether it is granted by a company or to it, is liable to give rise to difficulties with regard to the principles governing corporate law. Which explains why certain rules have been set. The guarantee is therefore governed by specific corporate rules that transcend the common law rules made to that effect. But it also involves meeting the formal requirements designed to protect the individual guarantor, and binding the creditor to obligations such as the duty of disclosure, duty of warning, the principle of proportionality ...If the Dutreil law has failed to observe the requirements of cohesion and simplification of surety law, can we therefore say that the future is dependent on a unification of the various laws pertaining to surety?

No description available.

Recently, South African company law underwent a dramatic overhaul through the introduction of the Companies Act 71 of 2008. Central to company law is the promotion of corporate governance: companies no longer are accountable to their shareholders only but to society at large. Leaders should direct company strategy and operations with a view to achieving the triple bottom-line (economic, social and environmental performance) and, thus, should manage the business in a sustainable manner. An important question in company law today: In whose interest should the company be managed? Corporate governance needs to address the entire span of responsibilities to all stakeholders of the company, such as customers, employees, shareholders, suppliers and the community at large. The Companies Act aims to balance the rights and obligations of shareholders and directors within companies and encourages the efficient and responsible management of companies. The promotion of human rights is central in the application of company law: it is extremely important given the significant role of enterprises within the social and economic life of the nation. The interests of various stakeholder groups in the context of the corporation as a “social institution” should be enhanced and protected. Because corporations are a part of society and the community they are required to be socially responsible and to be more accountable to all stakeholders in the company. Although directors act in the best interests of shareholders, collectively, they must also consider the interests of other stakeholders. Sustainable relationships with all the relevant stakeholders are important. The advancement of social justice is important to corporations in that they should take into account the Constitution, labour and company law legislation in dealing with social justice issues. Employees have become important stakeholders in companies and their needs should be taken into account in a bigger corporate governance and social responsibility framework. Consideration of the role of employees in corporations entails notice that the Constitution grants every person a fundamental right to fair labour practices. Social as well as political change became evident after South Africa's re-entry into the world in the 1990s. Change to socio-economic conditions in a developing country is also evident. These changes have a major influence on South African labour law. Like company law, labour law, to a large extent, is codified. Like company law, no precise definition of labour law exists. From the various definitions, labour law covers both the individual and collective labour law and various role-players are involved. These role-players include trade unions, employers/companies, employees, and the state. The various relationships between these parties, ultimately, are what guides a certain outcome if there is a power play between them. In 1995 the South African labour market was transformed by the introduction of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995. The LRA remains the primary piece of labour legislation that governs labour law in South Africa. The notion of industrial democracy and the transformation of the workplace are central issues in South African labour law. The constitutional change that have taken place in South Africa, by which the protection of human rights and the democratisation of the workplace are advanced contributed to these developments. Before the enactment of the LRA, employee participation and voice were much-debated topics, locally and internationally. In considering employee participation, it is essential to take due cognisance of both the labour and company law principles that are pertinent: the need for workers to have a voice in the workplace and for employers to manage their corporations. Employee participation and voice should be evident at different levels: from informationsharing to consultation to joint decision-making. Corporations should enhance systems and processes that facilitate employee participation and voice in decisions that affect employees. The primary research question under investigation is: What role should (and could) employees play in corporate decision-making in South Africa? The main inquiry of the thesis, therefore, is to explore the issue of granting a voice to employees in companies, in particular, the role of employees in the decision-making processes of companies. The thesis explores various options, including supervisory co-determination as well as social co-determination, in order to find solutions that will facilitate the achievement of employee participation and voice in companies in South Africa. / LLD, North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2015

Recently, South African company law underwent a dramatic overhaul through the introduction of the Companies Act 71 of 2008. Central to company law is the promotion of corporate governance: companies no longer are accountable to their shareholders only but to society at large. Leaders should direct company strategy and operations with a view to achieving the triple bottom-line (economic, social and environmental performance) and, thus, should manage the business in a sustainable manner. An important question in company law today: In whose interest should the company be managed? Corporate governance needs to address the entire span of responsibilities to all stakeholders of the company, such as customers, employees, shareholders, suppliers and the community at large. The Companies Act aims to balance the rights and obligations of shareholders and directors within companies and encourages the efficient and responsible management of companies. The promotion of human rights is central in the application of company law: it is extremely important given the significant role of enterprises within the social and economic life of the nation. The interests of various stakeholder groups in the context of the corporation as a “social institution” should be enhanced and protected. Because corporations are a part of society and the community they are required to be socially responsible and to be more accountable to all stakeholders in the company. Although directors act in the best interests of shareholders, collectively, they must also consider the interests of other stakeholders. Sustainable relationships with all the relevant stakeholders are important. The advancement of social justice is important to corporations in that they should take into account the Constitution, labour and company law legislation in dealing with social justice issues. Employees have become important stakeholders in companies and their needs should be taken into account in a bigger corporate governance and social responsibility framework. Consideration of the role of employees in corporations entails notice that the Constitution grants every person a fundamental right to fair labour practices. Social as well as political change became evident after South Africa's re-entry into the world in the 1990s. Change to socio-economic conditions in a developing country is also evident. These changes have a major influence on South African labour law. Like company law, labour law, to a large extent, is codified. Like company law, no precise definition of labour law exists. From the various definitions, labour law covers both the individual and collective labour law and various role-players are involved. These role-players include trade unions, employers/companies, employees, and the state. The various relationships between these parties, ultimately, are what guides a certain outcome if there is a power play between them. In 1995 the South African labour market was transformed by the introduction of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995. The LRA remains the primary piece of labour legislation that governs labour law in South Africa. The notion of industrial democracy and the transformation of the workplace are central issues in South African labour law. The constitutional change that have taken place in South Africa, by which the protection of human rights and the democratisation of the workplace are advanced contributed to these developments. Before the enactment of the LRA, employee participation and voice were much-debated topics, locally and internationally. In considering employee participation, it is essential to take due cognisance of both the labour and company law principles that are pertinent: the need for workers to have a voice in the workplace and for employers to manage their corporations. Employee participation and voice should be evident at different levels: from informationsharing to consultation to joint decision-making. Corporations should enhance systems and processes that facilitate employee participation and voice in decisions that affect employees. The primary research question under investigation is: What role should (and could) employees play in corporate decision-making in South Africa? The main inquiry of the thesis, therefore, is to explore the issue of granting a voice to employees in companies, in particular, the role of employees in the decision-making processes of companies. The thesis explores various options, including supervisory co-determination as well as social co-determination, in order to find solutions that will facilitate the achievement of employee participation and voice in companies in South Africa. / LLD, North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2015

À coté de l’objectif immédiat d’uniformiser les législations des États membres, l’OHADA s’est fixée un objectif médiat, celui de créer un vaste marché sans frontière. Or au regard des difficultés pour les sociétés commerciales de déplacer leurs sièges sociaux d’un État membre à un autre, nous ne pouvons que constater que l’existence de ce marché intégré n’est pas encore une réalité pour elles. Il apparaît alors que la seule uniformisation du droit des sociétés commerciales par l’OHADA ne suffit pas à leur permettre de réaliser des opérations de restructuration transfrontalière. Cette thèse a ainsi montré que l’OHADA a besoin d’évoluer et de se transformer pour mettre en place un véritable droit à la mobilité pour les sociétés commerciales au sein son espace communautaire. Elle doit pour cela compléter son intégration juridique par une intégration économique consacrant un libre établissement dont les opérations de mobilité seraient des modalités d’exercice, comme l’a fait l’Union européenne. Ce droit à la mobilité ne devra toutefois pas s’exercer de manière abusive. L’OHADA devra donc trouver un équilibre entre une mobilité fluidifiée et une protection efficace des actionnaires, salariés et tiers. De même il conviendra de rechercher un équilibre dans la gestion de la coexistence des normes communautaires qui ne manquera pas de se présenter dans le régime des opérations de mobilité puisqu’il s’agit d’un problème récurrent dans l’espace OHADA. / Apart from the direct objective of the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA) to standardize the law, its indirect objective relates to the creation of a large common market. However, regarding the difficulties for companies to transfer their registered office from one member state to another, we can see that the existence of such market is still not a reality for them. Therefore, it appears that the only standardizing of the corporate law by OHADA is not sufficient to allow them to perform their cross-border mergers. This research shows thus that OHADA needs to change and to transform itself to put in place a real right to mobility in the community area for the companies. Like the European Union, it should complete the legal integration by an economic integration setting up a freedom of establishment, including border restructuring operations. But this right to mobility should not be abused. OHADA will have to find a balance between facilitating the mobility and protecting efficiently minority shareholders, employees and third parties rights. Similarly a balance must be struck to solve the conflict of community norms in the restructuring operations legal regime, since it is a recurrent problem for OHADA space.