The topic of Limited Liability Company is a popular issue among the professional public due to the fact that Limited Liability Company belongs to the most favourite and the most widespread companies. This thesis comprehensively explains duties of members of Limited Liability Company in terms of Business Corporations Act and, where appropriate, compares them with those contained in the Commercial Code. After the brief discourse about Limited Liability Company, its nature and its position among the business corporations, the thesis provides characteristics of a share with emphasis on its qualitative aspect. In the second chapter the schemes of duties of members in works of various authors are first of all compared and critically assessed, and subsequently the own division of duties of members is created. A criterion for the division of duties is the fact, whether they are governed by general or special regulation and in the latter whether the duties arise on the basis of the act, or the Memorandum of Association. The characteristics of duties itself is included in the third to sixth chapters, which successively explain the duty of loyalty, the contributory duty, the liability duty, the duty of additional contribution, the duty of personal participation on a company, the duty to contribute to the...

This paper deals with a comparison between the Czech duty of due managerial care of a member of governing body of limited company and the Irish non-fiduciary duty to exercise care, skill and diligence of a director of limited company (hereinafter also referred as "duty of care"). The paper aims to find out a possible way to improve legislation of the duty of due managerial care on the basis of comparison with the duty of care. The duty of care sets the ground for the comparison, therefore the paper deals first with the Irish legal status of the duty of care, which has been recently changed by the Companies Act 2014. Despite of the codification of the directors' duties, the core of interpretation and application of the duty of care still rests in judicial decisions. Nevertheless, the change of source and statutory wording of the duty means that the substance of Re City Equitable [1925] does not represent a good law anymore. The standard of care of Re City Equitable [1925] has been replaced by the minimal objective standard based on the British judgment Re D'Jan of London [1994]. The content of the duty of care is determined on the case by case basis, but in any event it consists of conclusions of the British judgment Re Barings [1999], which has been accepted by the Irish courts in restriction...

Liability of members of governing bodies of juristic persons Mgr. Lucie Novotná Krtoušová Abstract The aim of the presented doctoral thesis entitled "Theoretical Concept of Liability of Members of the Governing Bodies of Juristic Persons" is to determine what requirements can be placed on natural persons who act as members of the governing bodies of juristic persons, and to specify the substance of due managerial care as a legal basis for potential liability. The Civil Code lays down the duty of a governing body member to act with due managerial care in the discharge of his/her office in its general part; the relevant provisions thus apply to members of the governing bodies of all juristic persons under both private and public law, provided that this is compatible with their legal nature. Compliance with the duty of due managerial care - in cases where the governing body members act as representatives of the juristic person - is the decisive criterion for determining whether or not they will be liable to the juristic person for any damage caused in the discharge of their office. However, it is questionable whether this is a case of fault-based liability for breach of a legal duty or strict liability for breach of a contractual obligation. The question of whether we will conceive liability of members of...

No description available.

近年來我國屢次爆發掏空公司資產之弊案，而細究其掏空之方式，多係藉由公司之交易行為，將公司資產不法輸送予特定人士。我們不難發現這些特定人士時常某程度與公司之董事或控制股東，具有一定之利害關係，甚至這些特定人士即為董事或控制股東本身。正因如此，關係人交易在我國公司治理議題上逐漸受到重視，並引起廣泛之討論，尤其針對具有董事或控制股東身分之人。由於此兩類身分之人同時具有掌握公司資訊及影響公司經營決策之權力，更易藉此方式自公司謀取私利。 我國對於關係人交易下董事之義務，雖已有規範，然而自比較法之觀點，美國法對此部分顯然較我國完備，不僅對於關係人交易設有事前之董事行為標準，並且對於符合行為標準之關係人交易，給予董事安全港之保護。同時，配合司法實務上所發展之司法審查標準，採取寬嚴不一的審查模式，使董事得於關係人交易中合理預測訴訟風險。一方面可降低關係人交易中非常規交易發生之可能性，另一方面亦不至於全然扼殺關係人交易在現代經濟社會中產生之正面價值。我國法之董事義務既是繼受英美法上受任人義務之概念，因此本文嘗試分析美國法中關於關係人交易之相關規定，希冀做為我國修法之參考以求法制之完備。 又我國現行公司法在控制股東義務方面，似存在重大之法律漏洞。尤其在關係人交易下，有心人士為規避擔任董事可能帶來之相關義務，轉而選擇置身於幕後，成為不具董事身分卻實際掌握公司經營決策權之控制股東。此無疑對於欲利用關係人交易不法掏空公司之人，開啟方便之大門。事實上，在英國及美國法上對於控制股東在特定情況下課予如同公司董事一般之受任人義務，而本文則將其焦點限縮在關係人交易下控制股東之義務，經由整理分析英美兩國法制上之條文、學說及重要判決，以期建構出我國規範關係人交易下控制股東義務之依據。

I de fall enskilda aktieägare tillfogas skada, genom organledamots handlande, innehar dessa rättigheten att påkalla skadeståndsansvar enligt 29:1 1 st. 2 men. ABL. I den svenska rättstillämpningen ter sig dock tillämpningen av paragrafen, i samband med indirekta skador, problematisk. Problematiken hänför sig till vilka regler, vars åsidosättande, aktualiserar tillämpningen av paragrafen tillsammans med aktieägares talerätt. Två tolkningar kan i fallet identifieras, vilka framförts inom doktrinen, varvid en begränsad och en mer liberal. Även om den liberala tolkningen är förenad med viss problematik, är denna enligt mitt förmenande den vilken bör tillämpas. En sådan tillämpning skulle således innebära att enskilda aktieägare tillerkänns talerätt vid indirekt skada, då regler vilka ger uttryck för normskyddsläran och bolagsledningens lojalitetsplikt åsidosatts. Rättsutvecklingen har vidare givet upphov till frågan, huruvida en ”indirekt” indirekt skada kan omfattas av paragrafens tillämpningsområde. En sådan skada uppstår särskilt i koncernförhållanden då dotterbolaget tillfogas en direkt skada, vilken därigenom åsamkar aktieägarna i dess moderbolag en ”indirekt” indirekt skada. Skadan faller utanför paragrafens tillämpningsområde, då de skadedrabbade inte utgör aktieägare i dotterbolaget. En lösning enligt mitt förmenande, varigenom paragrafens tillämpning koncernanpassas, är att principen om ansvarsgenombrott i betydelsen genomsyn nyttjas. Principens aktualisering medför att ett moder- och dotterbolag betraktas som en juridisk enhet, om erforderliga rekvisit uppfylls, varigenom de skadedrabbade aktieägarna från ett teoretiskt perspektiv även ses som aktieägare i dotterbolaget. Effekten av principens tillämpning är sålunda att en ”indirekt” indirekt skada faller inom paragrafens tillämpningsområde. / Whenever individual shareholders inflict an injury, due to action taken by a corporate member, they possess the right to impose liability in accordance with 29:1 1 st. 2 men. ABL. The paragraph is though associated with some difficulties when it comes to an indirect injury. The difficulties regard which rules that have to be infringed, in order for the paragraph to be applicable and thereby providing shareholders with the right to sue. Two different interpretations can hereby be identified, whereby one limited and the other one more liberal. Even if the liberal interpretation is associated with some difficulties, I find that this one should be applied. Such an application would mean that an individual shareholder acquire the right to sue, for an indirect injury, when rules protecting a third person and the corporate member’s duty of loyalty have been infringed. Legal progress has also given rise to another question, whether an “indirect” indirect injury falls within the paragraphs application. Such an injury is mostly affiliated with corporate groups where the daughter company causes a direct injury, whereby the shareholders in the mother company causes an “indirect” indirect injury. Since the shareholder here is not an owner of the daughter company, the paragraph could not be applied. A solution to this problem is, according to me, an application of the principle piercing the corporate veil, whereby the paragraphs application extends to corporate groups. The effect of the principles application is that a mother- and daughter company becomes one legal entity, if the prerequisites are fulfilled. The outcome is hereby that a shareholder in the mother company, from a theoretical perspective, also is regarded to be an owner of the daughter company. Wherefore an “indirect” indirect injury hereby falls within the scope of the paragraphs application.

La constitution d’une fiducie-trust a comme effet la création d’une universalité juridique, le patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund. De cette universalité, les bénéficiaires-cestuis que trusts tirent les avantages que le constituant-settlor a prévu pour eux ; ainsi pour qu’ils puissent obtenir leurs avantages, il faut que le patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund soit en bon état. D’où l’importance d’avoir des moyens adéquates qui protègent le patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund. Dans le cas contraire, les possibilités que le but d’une fiducie-trust déterminée soit réalisé se réduisent, et l'efficacité de l'ensemble de l'institution est remise en question. La protection du patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund commence par des moyens qui évitent à cette universalité d’être endommagée. Puisque toute action, comme toute inaction du fiduciaire-trustee, peut avoir des effets négatifs sur le patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund, il faut empêcher qu’il endommage cette universalité. A l’égard du fiduciaire-trustee, le patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund encourt deux dangers : non seulement que le fiduciaire-trustee agisse dans un intérêt autre que celui des cestuis que trusts, mais aussi qu’il soit négligent dans l’exécution de ses obligations. Pour faire face à ces dangers, et empêcher que le patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund soit endommagé par le fiduciaire-trustee, deux obligations lui sont imposées : le devoir de loyauté-duty of loyalty et le devoir de diligence-duty of care. D’autre part, si le patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund peut être endommagé par le fiduciaire-trustee, il peut aussi être endommagé par des tiers. La protection à l’égard des tiers commence en faisant du fiduciaire-trustee le titulaire des droits mis en fiducie-trust (s’il s’agit d’une propriété, il sera propriétaire ; s’il s’agit d’une créance, il sera créancier) ; elle se poursuit en rendant les biens fiduciés, et donc le patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund, indépendants du patrimoine du fiduciaire-trustee.Bien qu’il existe des moyens préventifs de protection du patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund, ces moyens ne sont pas infaillibles. Ainsi, quand le patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund est endommagé, il est nécessaire que le constituant et les bénéficiaires-cestuis que trusts disposent de recours pour faire face aux préjudices soufferts par cette universalité. Parmi les moyens curatifs de protection, on en trouve de nature personnelle : ceux dont les remèdes visent l’exécution en nature de la fiducie-trust et ceux qui visent la réparation du patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund. Pour réparer le dommage causé au patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund, on trouve aussi des remèdes de nature réelle. Si le droit anglais offre de vrais remèdes réels, en revanche le droit français offre de « faux » remèdes réels puisque, même si ces remèdes ne sont pas stricto sensu des remèdes réels, ils ont des effets analogues aux remèdes du droit anglais. / The constitution of a fiducie-trust has the effect of creating a patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund. Because the beneficiaries obtain their benefits from the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund it has to be in a condition that permits them to obtain those benefits. Hence the importance of having adequate means to protect the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund. The protection of the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund starts by preventing it from being harmed. Since any action or any inaction of the fiduciaire-trustee can have negative effects on the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund, it is necessary to begin by protecting it from the fiduciaire-trustee. There are two situations which have been proven to be dangerous to the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund: a) when the fiduciaire-trustee acts in an interest other than that of those of the beneficiaries and b) when the fiduciaire-trustee is negligent in the performance of his obligations. To cope with these two problems and to prevent the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund from being damaged by the fiduciaire-trustee, two obligations are imposed upon him: a) the devoir de loyauté-duty of loyalty and b) the devoir de diligence-duty of care. If the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund is at risk of the actions of the fiduciaire-trustee, it is also at risk of the actions of third parties. The protection of the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund from third parties begin by the ownership of the fiduciaire-trustee and continues by separating the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund from the personal property of the fiduciaire-trustee. Because the preventive measures that protect the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund are not infallible, it is necessary that the constituant and the beneficiaries have access to legal remedies for when the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund has been damaged. Among the remedial protection are those of personal nature, including remedies for specific enforcement of the fiducie-trust and those that tend to repair the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund. To repair the damage caused to the patrimoine fiduciaire-trust fund there are also real remedies. If English law provides true real remedies, in contrast to French law offers "fake" real remedies because even if the nature of those remedies are not strictly real, they have similar effects to those offered by English law.

Au cours des dernières années, plusieurs professionnels de la santé ont dénoncé publiquement des situations problématiques affectant le système de santé et des services sociaux du Québec, notamment par le biais des réseaux sociaux et des médias traditionnels. Alors qu’ils contribuent à renforcer la transparence des organismes du réseau de la santé et à protéger les droits des usagers, ces lanceurs d’alerte se heurtent à une culture du silence et s’exposent, encore aujourd’hui, à des mesures de représailles. Ce mémoire cherche à clarifier le cadre juridique entourant les dénonciations publiques effectuées par les professionnels de la santé. La première partie examine la portée de la liberté d’expression dont jouissent ces professionnels. Cette liberté fondamentale, comme le droit du public d’être informé, n’est pas absolue. Son exercice doit être concilié avec d’autres droits et obligations, dont le droit à la réputation de l’employeur, le devoir de loyauté et les obligations déontologiques du professionnel, ainsi que les droits des patients. La deuxième partie s’intéresse à la protection juridique des dénonciateurs. Au fil des ans, le législateur a adopté plusieurs dispositions afin de faciliter la divulgation de certains actes répréhensibles. Celles-ci protègent principalement les personnes qui font des signalements à l’interne ou auprès d’une autorité compétente. Dans une perspective critique, ce mémoire souligne les insuffisances du droit québécois en matière de dénonciation publique et propose des avenues interprétatives et législatives visant à renforcer la protection des lanceurs d’alerte dans le secteur de la santé. / In recent years, several healthcare professionals have publicly denounced problematic situations affecting Quebec's health and social services system, notably via traditional and social media. Although they contribute to strengthening transparency in healthcare institutions and protecting the rights of users, these whistleblowers face a culture of silence and are still exposed to retaliation. This Master's thesis seeks to clarify the legal framework governing public disclosure made by healthcare professionals. The first part discusses the scope of the professionals' freedom of expression. This fundamental freedom, such as the public's right to be informed, is not absolute. Its exercise must be reconciled with other rights and obligations, including the employer's right to reputation, the duty of loyalty, ethical obligations, and the patients' rights. The second part focuses on legal protection for whistleblowers. The legislator has adopted over the years many provisions to facilitate the disclosure of wrongdoings. These provisions mainly protect whistleblowers who report internally or to a competent authority. Adopting a critical perspective, this thesis highlights the weaknesses of Quebec's legal framework on public disclosure and proposes interpretative and legislative pathways to reinforce the protection of whistleblowers in the healthcare sector.

The purpose of this dissertation is to provide its readers with a detailed and comprehensive look at the institute of duty of care, business judgment rule and related civil and partly also criminal liability of members of (not only) statutory bodies of capital business companies, and in this respect also to introduce an internal compliance program as one of the main instruments of good and effective corporate governance. The main objective of this dissertation is therefore to verify or refute the hypothesis whether, and if so in what particular form, can an internal compliance program be seen as an institute helping members of statutory bodies of capital business companies in fulfilling specific requirements and obligations of their duty to carry out the statutory function with due (managerial) care. The existence (implementation) of an internal compliance program is quite commonly connected with so called regulated markets and also with individual business corporations whose ownership structure extends the boundaries of the Czech Republic (typically British or American business corporations seated in the Czech Republic). But what about a wide neutral zone of Czech business corporations, i.e. especially small and medium-sized capital business companies? Shall these implement an internal compliance program as well? And, if so, on what grounds and with what benefits?

La théorie classique du contrat et ses corollaires, l’autonomie de la volonté des parties et le principe de la stabilité des contrats, ont longtemps régné en droit des obligations. Depuis l’introduction du Code civil du Québec, la notion de bonne foi a été l’objet de plusieurs textes de doctrine et de plusieurs décisions judiciaires phares. La notion est considérée comme l’outil de prédilection des juristes pour assurer une meilleure justice contractuelle, parfois pour développer des théories allant à l’encontre du principe de la stabilité des contrats. Or, le récent arrêt Churchill Falls nous enseigne que la bonne foi a ses propres contours et ne peut donc pas être utilisée en dehors des limites qui lui sont intrinsèques. Dans ce travail, la notion de bonne foi est revisitée conjointement avec la notion d’équité afin de présenter leurs paramètres fondamentaux initiaux, leurs mutations et leurs portées actuelles en droit civil québécois. Bien que ces deux outils contribuent à assurer une meilleure justice commutative dans les échanges, la bonne foi a ce l’équité n’a pas : une synchronicité avec les principes de stabilité des contrats et d’autonomie de la volonté. Cette constatation peut expliquer la mise au placard de l’équité à titre d’outil de justice dans le régime général des obligations. Ainsi, en filigrane, il appert que la stabilité des contrats demeure une valeur prédominante du législateur malgré les allures d’une nouvelle moralité du droit des obligations. / The classical theory of contract and its corollaries, the autonomy of the parties' will and the principle of the stability of contracts, have ruled the law of obligations for long. Since the introduction of the Civil Code of Québec, the notion of good faith has been the subject of several doctrinal texts and landmark judicial decisions. The notion is considered as the preferred tool of jurists to ensure a better contractual justice, sometimes to develop theories that run counter to the principle of the stability of contracts. However, the Supreme Court in its judgment Churchill Falls decision teaches us that good faith has its own contours and therefore cannot be used outside its intrinsic limits. In this paper, the notion of good faith is revisited in conjunction with the notion of equity to present their initial fundamental parameters, their mutations, and their current scope in Quebec civil law. Although both tools contribute to ensuring better commutative justice in exchanges, good faith has what equity does not: synchronicity with the principles of stability of contracts and autonomy of the will. This observation may explain the shelving of equity as a tool of justice in the general regime of obligations. Thus, it appears that the stability of contracts remains a predominant value of the legislator despite the appearance of a new morality in the law of obligations.