Bibliographie sélective OHADA

L'associé salarié est aujourd'hui une figure répandue dans le paysage juridique, en dépit d'une contradiction évidente : il est à la fois propriétaire du capital et subordonné à la société qui l'emploie. Cette antinomie apparente et les interrogations qui en découlent apparaissent, pourtant, majoritairement passées sous silence. Le cumul des qualités d'associé et de salarié est ainsi admis par principe, notamment depuis l'avènement des dispositifs légaux d'actionnariat salarié.Ce silence nourrit l'opportunité d'une étude approfondie de la figure de l'associé salarié. Une analyse miroir du droit des sociétés et du droit du travail est à même de vérifier la réelle compatibilité de ces qualités, tant au niveau de la licéité du cumul que des règles qui lui sont applicables. La proposition est la suivante : se plonger dans l'analyse chronologique du cumul des qualités d'associé et de salarié, de sa naissance à sa disparition, par une étude combinée du droit du travail et du droit des sociétés.En ressort une compatibilité relative des qualités tenant davantage à l'influence du droit du travail que du droit des sociétés. Ce constat ne doit cependant pas minimiser les influences réciproques des deux branches du droit. Contrairement au postulat qui semble suivi par une majorité d'auteurs, l'associé salarié n'est pas juste un salarié particulier : il est également un associé singulier. The employee shareholder is now a commonplace figure, despite a major contradiction: he is both owner of the capital and subordinate to the company that employs him. This apparent conflict and the questions it raises are largely ignored. The dual status of shareholder and employee is accepted as a matter of principle, particularly since the advent of legal employee share ownership schemes.This silence provides an opportunity for a study of the situation of the employee shareholder. A mirror analysis of company law and labour law is able to study the real compatibility of these qualities, simultaneously of the lawfulness of the combination and the rules applicable to it. The proposal is: to analyse in chronological order the dual status of shareholder and employee, from its inception to its demise, by a combined study of labour law and company law.A relative compatibility of these roles emerges. It is due more to the influence of labour law than company law. However, this observation should not minimise the reciprocal influences of the two branches. Contrary to the assumption that seems to be followed by some authors, the employee shareholder is not just a particular employee: he is also a singular shareholder.

L’opération de fusion-absorption d’une personne morale est une question en soi difficilement appréhendée tant dans les effets qu’elles déploient que dans l’organisation d’une telle opération. Cette difficulté propre à la nature d’une telle opération prendra une allure tout autre lorsqu’une personne morale membre d’un conseil d’administration s’y trouve impliquer. Toutes les hypothèses pouvant être développées traduisent non seulement la diversité mais également la complexité d’un tel sujet. Si cette question telle qu’elle est évoquée, est révélatrice du caractère instrumental du droit des sociétés, force est de reconnaître que la résolution d’une telle problématique devrait se faire par la conciliation des caractéristiques propres au droit des fusions mais aussi en tenant compte des spécificités entourant la personne morale administrateur. La transmission universelle du patrimoine, la réorganisation des pouvoirs post-fusion, les droits des créanciers, le problème de la représentation de la personne morale dans la société absorbante, la gouvernance de la société administrée, l’intrusion d’une personne morale tierce, les questions de fusions internationales sont autant de questions soulevées par cette problématique. La solution de cette problématique commande une étude minutieuse des questions soulevées à l’aune du droit OHADA et du droit français.

La notion d’apport en nature revêt des enjeux d’une grande complexité, tant sur le plan juridique que pratique. Elle soulève de nombreuses difficultés d’interprétation et de mise en œuvre. Celles-ci sont exacerbées par l’essor de la diversité des biens et droits susceptibles d’être apportés en société, ainsi que par la multiplicité des modes de rémunération des associés. Cependant, cette évolution n’a pas été suffisamment suivie par le législateur et la contribution d’une partie importante de la jurisprudence et de la doctrine antérieures est devenue quasi obsolète. Face à cette problématique émergente, un renouvellement du contour juridique de la notion d’apport en nature dans toutes ses dimensions est devenu une nécessité impérieuse.Cette thèse propose une approche globale de la notion d’apport en nature. Cet apport peut être effectué à titre particulier, permettant ainsi la réintégration d’un ou plusieurs actifs ou activités utiles au développement de la société. En outre, le délestage d’un actif non nécessaire à l’exploitation, par voie d’apport, est également possible. Toutefois, le régime juridique de droit commun auquel est soumis cet apport peut s’avérer inapplicable en raison de restrictions de nature légale ou contractuelle. Dans ce contexte, l’apport à titre universel constitue une solution pertinente pour surmonter cette contrainte. Cet apport concerne notamment les opérations de fusion, de scission et d’apport partiel d’actifs et se concrétise toujours par une transmission universelle de patrimoine, dont les enjeux et conséquences sont examinés en profondeur dans la présente étude.Ce travail aborde également le paradoxe lié à l’évaluation de l’apport en nature et aux modes de rémunération et tente de mettre en évidence une synthèse des insuffisances du cadre législatif et doctrinal entourant le sujet. Il propose ainsi des alternatives envisageables pour surmonter les contraintes inhérentes à la réalisation de certaines opérations d’apport. Restent d’autres situations, dans lesquelles l’intervention du législateur apparaît nécessaire pour contourner les contraintes mises en évidence dans l’étude.

Contrairement aux entreprises dites "classiques", qui ont pour objectif principal la production de biens ou de services dans un cadre lucratif, l'entreprise de tendance est une catégorie juridique et sociale à part. Sa spécificité ne réside pas dans la recherche de profits, mais dans la promotion et la défense de convictions, qu'elles soient religieuses, politiques, ou philosophiques. Cette dimension convictionnelle distingue ces entreprises des autres et impose de définir avec précision leurs contours, car toutes ne peuvent pas revendiquer ce statut. L'entreprise de tendance n’est donc pas un modèle d'entreprise ordinaire. Au cœur de son fonctionnement se trouvent des valeurs et des croyances qui façonnent non seulement son activité mais aussi son identité. Ce type d’entreprise devient un instrument au service d'une idéologie ou d'une foi, portant un message à la société et jouant un rôle crucial dans le maintien du pluralisme idéologique dans une démocratie. Cependant, la reconnaissance juridique des entreprises de tendance varie largement d’un pays à l’autre, en fonction de l’histoire, des sensibilités sociétales et du cadre législatif.La manière dont les États reconnaissent et encadrent les entreprises de tendance reflète leur conception de la place des convictions religieuses ou politiques dans l'espace public. En fonction de cette reconnaissance sociale et légale, ces entreprises peuvent bénéficier de régimes juridiques particuliers, tant dans leurs relations avec les salariés qu’en matière de financement. Cette reconnaissance variable, ainsi que les privilèges qui peuvent en découler, doivent être analysés, notamment à l'aune des décisions des Cours européennes.

Le remboursement des apports en société est l’une des notions utilisées fréquemment juridiquement, mais qui n’est pas définie ni par la loi ni par la jurisprudence ; il n’existe pas un régime juridique, indépendant et délimité, qui l’encadre. De plus, un nombre limité d’auteurs ont fourni des définitions pour le remboursement des apports qui ne sont pas même unifiées. Ils ont aussi fait référence à la restitution des apports souvent dans le même contexte, sans établir une distinction entre les deux termes « remboursement » et « restitution ». Avec l’absence d’une définition précise de remboursement des apports, les questions se posent : si d’après le régime juridique applicable dans le cadre des sociétés, il existe une obligation de restitution des apports qui va se varier selon le type de l’apport en cause ; ou le remboursement de l’apport constitue le paiement d’une obligation, autre que celle d’une restitution. Notamment, à la lumière de la relation entre l’apport et le capital social en vertu de laquelle les titres sociaux sont eux qui représentent les différents droits de l’associé et le montant du capital social est celui qui représente la dette de la société et l’ensemble des créances des associés. L’étude fournit ainsi une identification des éléments caractéristiques de remboursement des apports en société. Elle fournit également une identification de ses éléments perturbateurs, en abordant la question d’éventuelle manifestation de remboursement des apports au cours de la vie sociale, et en analysant le statut original de l’apporteur en industrie dont l’apport ne fait pas juridiquement l’objet de remboursement. The reimbursement of the contributions to a company is one of the notions frequently used in legal contexts, but it has not been defined either by law or by jurisprudence. There is no independent and defined legal regime governing it. Moreover, only a limited number of authors have provided definitions of the reimbursement of contributions that are not even unified. They have referred to the restitution of contributions, always in the same context, without making the distinction between the two terms "reimbursement" and "restitution". With the absence of a precise definition of the reimbursement of contributions, questions arise: according to the applicable legal regime for companies, does an obligation of restitution of contributions, varying according to the type of contribution, exist, or is the reimbursement of contributions the payment of an obligation other than restitution? These questions are especially relevant in light of the relationship between contributions and capital, under which shares represent the different rights of the partners and the amount of the capital represents the debt of the company. Thus, the study provides an identification of the characteristic elements of the reimbursement of contributions to a company. It also identifies its disruptive elements by addressing the eventual manifestation of the reimbursement of the contributions during the life of the company, and by analyzing the distinct status of a partner who has made a contribution in industry, which is not legally subject to reimbursement.

Le législateur OHADA s'est inspiré du droit français pour fixer le cadre juridique de la variabilité du capital social ; d'où l'étude orientée vers une approche comparatiste. Cette approche a permis une confrontation entre deux (02) systèmes juridiques, en vue de dégager les problèmes de droit et d'envisager une amélioration du cadre juridique de la variabilité du capital en droit OHADA ; l'objectif étant de dégager une contribution à l'amélioration du droit OHADA à travers le droit comparé. A l'analyse, il ressort que la variabilité du capital social comporte des facteurs attractifs pour les acteurs économiques. En effet, elle constitue un mécanisme de financement des sociétés, en raison d'une part, de sa capacité à renforcer les capitaux propres sans charge financière et, d'une part, de sa capacité à constituer un actionnariat spécifiquement orienté sur la rentabilité des sociétés. De même, elle pourrait susciter un intérêt pour les investisseurs intéressés par la célérité et l'efficacité dans les opérations de financement des entreprises. L'efficacité du financement de la société par la mise en œuvre de la clause de variabilité du capital est tributaire, entre autres, de son attractivité auprès des acteurs économiques de manière générale, des investissements et des professionnels du droit en particulier. Cependant, plusieurs facteurs ne militeraient pas en faveur du recours à la variabilité du capital. Parmi ces facteurs figurent les risques découlant de la réduction du capital et la méconnaissance des acteurs économiques et des praticiens du droit de l'existence et/ou du fonctionnement du mécanisme de la variabilité du capital. Or, ces risques ne sont pas irrémédiables, dans la mesure où il existe des mécanismes juridiques appropriés pour y faire face. En somme, l'analyse du fonctionnement du mécanisme de la variabilité du capital social a mis en évidence ses capacités de mobilisation de financement, de recapitalisation de la société, de restructuration de la société et d'apporter une contribution à l'amélioration du cadre juridique des sociétés à capital variable. Elle a également permis de démontrer l'insuffisance de la justification ou du fondement du désintérêt des acteurs économiques et des praticiens du droit à l'égard de la variabilité du capital social

Anonim şirket organları, özel hukuktaki sözleşme özgürlüğünün bir sonucu olarak kendi yetki alanlarına giren konuları iç yönerge ile düzenleyebilirler. Anonim şirket yönetim kurulu da yetki alanına giren konularda iç yönerge çıkarmak suretiyle düzenleme yapabilir. Türk Ticaret Kanunu'nda yönetim kurulunun yönetim yetkisini devrettiği ve sınırlı yetkili ticari vekil ve diğer tacir yardımcıları atadığı durumlarda bu işlemleri bir iç yönerge çıkararak gerçekleştirmesi zorunlu tutulmuştur. Bununla birlikte anonim şirket yönetim kurulu iç yönergesinde iç yönerge çıkarma zorunluluğu doğuran bu iki durum dışında yetki alanına giren diğer birçok konuyu düzenleyebilir. Bu kapsamda belirli durumlarda çıkarılması zorunlu olan bu iç yönergelerin zorunlu içeriğinin dışında, iç yönergede, yönetim kurulunun görevleri, çalışma usulü, yönetim kurulu üyelerinin ve yönetim yetkisinin devredildiği kişilerin hak ve yükümlülükleri gibi birçok husus yer alabilir. Bu düzenlemelerin sınırını da ilk başta Türk Ticaret Kanunu ve diğer kanunların emredici hükümleri oluşturur. Yönetim kurulunun Türk Ticaret Kanunu'nda çizilen yetki sınırları da bu çerçevede yönetim kurulu iç yönergesinin azami içeriğini belirler. Çalışmamızın ilk bölümünde anonim şirketlerde iç yönerge terimi açıklanmaya çalışılmış, ardından yönetim kurulu iç yönergesi terimi yetki devrinden ve sınırlı yetkili ticari vekil ve diğer tacir yardımcısı atanmasından bağımsız şekilde yönetim kurulunun çıkardığı düzenleyici bir metin olarak ele alınmıştır. Çalışmamızın ikinci bölümünde anonim şirket yönetim kurulu iç yönergesinin içerebileceği düzenlemeler ve bunların iç yönergede ne şekilde düzenlenebileceği incelenmiştir. Çalışmamızın son bölümünde ise yönetim kurulunun kendi çıkardığı iç yönergeyi ihlal etmesinin sonuçları gibi iç yönergeye ilişkin diğer meseleler ele alınmıştır. The organs of a joint stock company, as a result of the freedom of contract in private law, can regulate matters within their jurisdiction through internal directives. The board of directors of a joint stock company can also regulate matters within its jurisdiction by issuing internal directives. According to the Turkish Commercial Code, it is mandatory for the board of directors to execute transactions, such as delegating management authority and appointing limited authority commercial representatives and other merchant assistants, through the issuance of an internal directive. However, beyond these two instances where issuing an internal directive is mandatory, the board of directors can regulate many other matters within its jurisdiction through an internal directive. In this context, aside from the mandatory content in specific situations, an internal directive can include many issues such as the duties of the board of directors, working procedures, and the rights and obligations of board members and those to whom management authority has been delegated. The boundaries of these regulations are primarily determined by the mandatory provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code and other laws. The authority limits outlined in the Turkish Commercial Code also define the maximum content of the board's internal directive. In the first part of our study, the term "internal directive" in joint stock companies is explained. Subsequently, the term "internal directive of the board of directors" is examined as a regulatory document issued by the board, independent of authority delegation and the appointment of limited authority commercial representatives and other merchant assistants. In the second part of our study, the potential regulations that could be included in the internal directive of the board of directors of a joint stock company and how these can be arranged within the internal directive are analyzed. In the final part of our study, other issues related to internal directives, such as the consequences of the board of directors violating its own internal directive, are discussed.

Bu doktora tezi, 6102 sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunu'nun 454. maddesinde düzenlenen imtiyazlı pay sahipleri özel kurulunu konu almaktadır. Çalışmanın ilk bölümünde imtiyaza ilişkin genel bilgiler verildikten sonra ikinci bölümünde imtiyazlı pay sahipleri özel kurulunun yapısı, yetkisi, hukuki niteliği üzerinde durulmuştur. Çalışmanın üçüncü ve dördüncü bölümlerinde, imtiyazlı pay sahipleri özel kurulunun toplanma şartları ile toplantı süreci kapsamlı bir şekilde ele alınmıştır. Çalışmanın son bölümünde ise imtiyazlı pay sahipleri özel kurul kararlarının hukuki niteliği, etkisi ve hükümsüzlüğü irdelenmiştir. Çalışmanın hazırlanmasında, Türk hukukundaki ilgili mevzuat hükümleri başta olmak üzere karşılaştırmalı hukuktaki dikkate değer yasal düzenlemeler, öğretideki görüşler ve yargı kararlarından faydalanılmıştır. Anahtar kelimeler: Anonim şirketler, imtiyaz, TTK m. 454, imtiyazlı pay, imtiyazlı pay sahipleri özel kurulu. This doctoral thesis deals with the special committee of privileged shareholders regulated under Article 454 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102. After giving general information about privilege in the first part of the study, the structure, authority, and legal nature of the special committee of privileged shareholders are mentioned in the second part. In the third and fourth parts of the study, the conditions for the meeting and the meeting process of the special committee of privileged shareholders are extensively discussed. In the last part of the study, the legal effect, nature, and invalidity of the special committee decisions of privileged shareholders are examined. In the preparation of the study, notable legal regulations in comparative law, doctrines and judicial decisions, especially related legislation in Turkish law have been benefited from. Key Words: Joint Stock Companies, privilege, the article 454 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102, privileged share, the special committee of privileged shareholders.

In law it is common to encounter two separate pieces of legislation which govern a single matter or transaction, for example, the Companies Act 71 of 2008 (the Companies Act) and the Securities Transfer Act 25 of 2007 both of which address the sale of shares. Similarly, the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (the Income Tax Act) and the Companies Act both have regulations which govern, respectively, tax law and company law matters in South Africa. These two Acts overlap in various business and commercial fields as tax is frequently an important component of any business transaction undertaken by a company. Issues, however, arise when the regulations in these two Acts, are inconsistent. This can be observed if one compares the current South African Income Tax and Companies Act, specifically as regards the sections involving merger and amalgamation transactions. Section 44 of the Income Tax Act governs merger and amalgamation transactions from a tax perspective and provides for tax rollover relief if certain requirements are met. The regulations governing mergers and amalgamations under the Companies Act are contained in sections 113, 115 and 116 of the Act. Although these sections in both Acts address the same transaction – a merger or amalgamation between two or more companies – there are several discrepancies between the regulations in the two Acts which appear to operate entirely independently of one another. In practice, one often sees that other sections in the Companies Act and Income Tax Act are used to achieve a merger due, in the main, to the uncertainties in the application of the relevant merger sections in the two Acts and the limited interaction between them. This study identifies and assesses the impact of the discrepancies identified in these two Acts in relation to merger and amalgamation transactions. The study makes recommendations to address these discrepancies and to align the South African Companies Act and Income Tax Act as regards merger/amalgamation transactions.

تهدف دراسة موضوع انسحاب الشريك في القانون الجزائري والقانون المقارن إلى تحديد التنظيم القانوني لعملية انسحاب الشريك من الشركة، والوقوف على أسباب ومبررات عملية الانسحاب، وأهم الوسائل المتاحة لتحقيقه، خاصة وأنّ آثار الانسحاب تنصرف أساسا إلى الشريك المنسحب، كما تمتدإلى الشركة والشركاء والغير الذي تعامل مع الشركة. وقد أثبتت الدراسة المقارنة في القانونين الجزائري والفرنسي، مدى تأثر القانون الجزائري بالقانون الفرنسي، بسبب غياب تنظيم قانوني خاص في التشريع الجزائري لمسالة انسحاب الشريك من الشركة. ونتيجة لهذا الفراغ القانوني، استوجب الرجوع إلى القواعد العامة في القانون المدني، الذي ينظم عقد الشركة بصفة عامة، مع الأخذ بعين الاعتبار خصوصية الشركات التجارية والأحكام الخاصة المنظمة لها. إنّ انسحاب الشريك، قد يكون إراديًا في حالة قيامه بالتخلّي عن حقوقه الاجتماعية في الشركة، وقد يكون الانسحاب لا إراديا، عندما يكون عن طريق حكم قضائي، بحيث يتم في هذه الحالة إنهاء مهام الشريك من دون إرادته. وكقاعدة عامة، فإن انسحاب الشريك يِؤدي حتما إلى انقضاء الشركة، لاسيما إذا تعلق الأمر بشركات الأشخاص، إلا إذا كانت القوانين الأساسية للشركة والشركاء الباقون، قد قرروا خلاف ذلك، بمعنى استمرار الشركة. L’étude du retrait de l’associé en droit algérien et droit comparé a pour but de déterminer la réglementation juridique du mécanisme du retrait de l’associé de la société, afin de mettre l’accent sur les motifs du retrait, les moyens et techniques juridiques pour y parvenir, mais surtout ses effets, car le retrait touche principalement les droits de l’associé, les partenaires associés, et enfin les tiers. L’étude comparative du droit algérien et français, réaffirme l’influence du droit algérien par le droit français en raison de l’absence d’une règlementation spécifique relative au droit de retrait de l’associé. En raison de ce vide juridique, il est nécessaire de se référer aux règles générales du droit civil qui régissent le contrat de société, tout en tenant compte des spécificités des différents types de sociétés commerciales et des textes qui les régissent. Il est à préciser, que le retrait de l’associé peut être volontaire suite à sa renonciation à ses droits sociaux, mais il peut être involontaire dans le cas du retrait judicaire, quand il s’agit de mettre fin de manière unilatérale aux fonctions de l’associé. En règle générale, le retrait de l’associé entraine obligatoirement la dissolution de la société, notamment dans le cas des sociétés de personnes, sauf si les statuts de la société ou les associés ont convenus autrement, c’est à dire de la continuité de la société.

المبدأ العام في الشركة ذات المسؤولية المحدودة هو تقييد التنازل عن الحصص، إذ لا يجوز التنازل عن الحصص إلى الغير إلا بموافقة أغلبية الشركاء الحائزين لثلاثة أرباع رأس المال. وهو ما نصت علية المادة571 من القانون التجاري. والاستثناء حرية التنازل عن الحصص إلى الأصول والفروع والأزواج مالم ينص القانون الأساسي على تقييد التنازل. كما يخضع فيها التنازل عن الحصص للاسترداد وهو حق مقرر لمصلحة الشركاء والشركة لشراء الحصص المرغوب في التنازل عنها في حالة رفض الموافقة على المتنازل إليه. وإذا كان الأصل العام في الشركة ذات المسؤولية المحدودة هو تقييد التنازل عن الحصص، فإن الحصص في هذه الشركة تنتقل بكل حرية إلى ورثة الشريك، بشرط أن لا يترتب على ذلك زيادة عدد الشركاء عن الحد الأقصى المقرر قانونا والذي هو 50 شريكا. ومع ذلك يمكن للشركاء تقييد انتقال الحصص إلى الورثة بشرط أن يتم إدراج هذا الشرط في القانون الأساسي للشركة. The general principle in a limited liability company is to restrict the assignment/ abdication of shares, as it is not permissible to assign shares to third parties except with the share-holders majority’s approval who possess three-quarters of the capital. This is what is stipulated in Article 571 of the Commercial Law. The exception is the freedom to assign/transfer shares to ascendants, descendants, and spouses, unless the Basic Law stipulates a restriction of abdication. In addition, the assignment of shares is subject to recovery, which is a right established in the interest of the partners and the company to purchase the desired shares to be assigned in the event of refusal to approve the assignee. Therefore if the general principle in the limited liability company is to restrict the abdication from shares, then the shares in this company are transferred freely to the partner’s heirs, provided that this does not result in an increase in the number of partners beyond the legally prescribed maximum, which are 50 partners. However, the partners can restrict the transfer of shares to the heirs, provided that this condition is included in the articles of association of the company.

Susceptible d'être lésés dans leurs droits représentés par les actions dont ils disposent, les minoritaires dans une société anonyme, ont besoin d'être protégés « non parce qu'ils sont minoritaires, mais parce que leurs intérêts apparaissent comme dignes de protection ». Il n'est pas rare dans le cadre du fonctionnement de la société anonyme d'assister à la prise de décisions contraires, non seulement à l'intérêt des minoritaires, mais également à l'intérêt social, par les actionnaires majoritaires dans l'unique dessein de satisfaire les membres de la majorité au détriment des autres actionnaires. Cette tendance à l'écrasement des minoritaires entraîne des conflits, sinon des oppositions entre actionnaires conduisant à la constitution de blocs antagonistes dont l'attitude peut provoquer une crise au sein de la société. L'étude réside dans l'analyse des garanties et dans la recherche constante d'une protection efficace qu'offrent le législateur et l'autorité du marché financier aux investisseurs minoritaires dans l'espace OHADA. Cette étude étendue en droit français existe aussi en droit OHADA.

Groups of companies are a complex corporate structure, whose regulation can be problematic, especially when it comes to liability. Indeed, liability within corporate groups draws forth a series of issues principally due to the principles of separate corporate personality and limited liability. In the context of limited liability, which is based on the notion of separate legal personality, the main issue waxes the protection of the creditors, in particular the creditors of the subsidiaries. One can find three regulatory templates for handling corporate groups and their liability: policing via general company and/or civil law (such as the English model); policing via special group legislation (such as the German model); and policing via branches of law such as insolvency law, antitrust law, and contract law, among others (which is the case in numerous jurisdictions, either coupled with the first or the second model). Lifting the corporate veil has come as an answer to corporate separateness, by permitting to ignore the shareholders’ limited liability and hold them personally liable for the debts of their companies in specific circumstances. However, one can hardly find cases in which the corporate veil has been successfully lifted, due to many factors. Other important questions that are posed in the scope of corporate groups liability are the parent company’s liability for the payment of its daughter companies’ debts when insolvency strikes and other respects, besides the matter of group liability. Furthermore, liability is as well a key player in terms of tort law, and corporate social responsibility has therefore found a place in the sun in the present climate.

State-owned enterprises (SOEs) have recently gained prominence in global markets and feature among the world’s most influential enterprises. The aim of this research project is to analyse the international norms in force regulating whether SOEs are considered state or non- state actors, and their conduct state or non-state conduct, the interpretation and application of these norms by adjudicators in different international regimes, and to provide alternative prisms through which these rules and decisions can be assessed and re-thought by political actors. I show that, in relation to SOEs, the concepts ‘state and ‘act of state’ have been ascribed diverse meanings by adjudicators and other international actors, who have employed legal standards with divergent wording and thresholds when dealing with similar questions. I argue that the fragmented meaning of these terms should be understood, in part, as a result of the inherent malleability of these terms and the different expert vocabularies employed across regimes. It is exhibited that adjudicators in the international trade and investment regimes are more inclined towards piercing the corporate veil of SOEs, potentially evidencing the existence of biases against SOEs, which are perceived as inherently economically inefficient and politically motivated actors in an indiscriminatory manner. In the last chapter, I introduce alternative lines of thought regarding the regulation of SOEs in international law. I suggest that, instead of engaging in theoretical discussions on the proper delineation between the public and the private sector, it is more useful to focus on the distributional impact of international rules on various actors, especially on developing and emerging economies where the presence of SOEs is very high. Such alternative prisms of analysis open paths for future research and practice, with the goal of designing an international economic order that incentivises institutional experimentation in the pursuit of economic development and distributional equity.

La protection juridique des associés minoritaires se justifie en droit des sociétés et en droit OHADA par l’absence directe de la gestion des sociétés commerciales par ces derniers. De ce fait, les deux ordres juridiques mettent en œuvre plusieurs mécanismes afin de protéger les intérêts des minoritaires. Ces mécanismes sont de plusieurs natures à savoir des règles juridiques favorisant un traitement égalitaire de tous les associés ou des droits exclusifs aux associés minoritaires favorisant un équilibre de pouvoirs dans la gestion de la société mais également la coexistence d’acteurs capables de réguler le bon fonctionnement de la société, notamment le juge, les associations de défenses d’intérêts des associés minoritaires.Dans les sociétés où les enjeux économiques sont très importants comme les sociétés faisant appel public à l’épargne, les législateurs français et OHADA, soucieux de protéger les associés minoritaires, ajoutent au droit commun, l’intervention du droit des marchés financiers qui vient renforcer la protection des minoritaires, notamment dans l’exercice de leur droit de cession. Ainsi, l’on remarque que le droit des sociétés français et le droit OHADA utilisent quasiment les mêmes fondements juridiques pour protéger les associés minoritaires. Il existe plus de similitudes que des différences dans les deux ordres juridiques puis que le législateurs OHADA a entrepris une réforme en 2014 afin de renforcer considérablement les compétences des associés minoritaires dans la gestion de la société. Cette réforme du droit OHADA s’est quasiment rapprochée du droit de société.Toutefois, malgré les efforts du droit des sociétés français et du droit OHADA de protéger les intérêts des associés minoritaires, subsiste une précarité du statut des minoritaires. La loi de la majorité fait obstacle à ce que l’on puisse objectiver que la protection apportée aux associés minoritaires est absolument efficace. Pour en arriver à une protection efficace certains droits devraient être généralisés pour contrôler sereinement la gestion sociale et leurs intérêts.

Phoenix activity involves conduct whereby a failing company (the old company) is replaced by a second company (the new company) in the operation of the same or a similar business and that involves the same or similar company controllers. Transactions of this nature can be legal and even be beneficial to society, since entrepreneurs who pursue a viable business may, if the new company succeeds, benefit the economy and many other stakeholders. These transactions are referred to as legal phoenix activity. Problems arise however when phoenix activity is engaged in with the goal of evading the debt of the old company, known as illegal phoenix activity. In other cases, even well-intentioned company controllers can cause significant harm by resurrecting a fundamentally flawed business. This conduct, although not illegal, is unduly prejudicial to stakeholders and is known as problematic phoenix activity. While this thesis focuses on illegal phoenix activity, several measures identified should also curb problematic phoenix activity. This study identifies the elements and common characteristics of illegal phoenix activity. It then analyses regulation pertaining to those elements and common characteristics with the aim of finding effective solutions to the problem. This includes evaluating measures that reverse prejudicial transactions that occur during illegal phoenix activity as well as holding complicit parties, such as company controllers and the new company, accountable for their actions. Regulation aimed at preventing and investigating illegal phoenix activity is also considered. This thesis uses the comparative legal approach to analyse regulatory responses to illegal phoenix activity. Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America are examined. Several reported cases in South Africa involving what appear to be illegal phoenix activity are explored, along with the existing measures that are applicable to illegal phoenix activity in South Africa. A single anti-phoenix provision is undesirable as it has the potential to unjustifiably infringe on legal phoenix activity. This thesis proposes a multi-pronged approach, which involves a combination of better enforcement of existing laws and the introduction of smaller targeted amendments to legislation aimed at reducing the incidence illegal phoenix activity.

Anonim şirketler hukukunda alacaklılar, şirketlerin dış finansman kaynaklarının merkezini oluşturmakta ve bu nedenle de son derece önemli bir menfaat grubunu teşkil etmektedirler. Bu durum şirket alacaklılarının çıkarlarının etkin bir biçimde gözetilmesi ve korunmasını gerekli kılmaktadır. Zira alacaklıların alacaklarına kavuşabilmeleri için müracaat edebilecekleri tek kaynak şirketin malvarlığıdır. Dolayısıyla anonim şirketin mali durumunun bozulması sonucu malvarlığının kayba uğraması veya uğrama tehlikesi altında olması, alacaklıların menfaatlerini zedeleyici niteliktedir. Bu durum mali durumu bozulan anonim şirketlerde, alacaklıların menfaatlerinin gözetilmesini ve özellikle de öncül (ex-ante) koruma imkânlarıyla bu risk gerçekleşmeden önce bu konuda tedbirler alınmasını gerektirmektedir. Kurumsal yönetim anlayışı, anonim şirketlerde menfaat grupları arasındaki çıkar çatışmalarının en iyi, en adil şekilde dengelenmesini hedeflemektedir. Bu itibarla bu tez çalışmasında söz konusu menfaat çatışmaları özelinde kurumsal yönetimin şeffaflık, adillik, hesap verilebilirlik ve sorumluluk ilkeleri çerçevesinde bir menfaat grubu olarak şirket alacaklılarının menfaatlerinin, mali durumu bozulan veya bozulma tehlikesi altında olan anonim şirketlerde nasıl gözetilmesi ve korunması gerektiği hususunda bir bakış açısı sunulması hedeflenmektedir. Bu bakış açısından hareketle sermaye kaybı yaşayan, borca batık hale gelen anonim şirketlerin mali durumlarının iyileştirilmesi maksadıyla sermayenin korunması esası benimsenerek öngörülen TTK m.376 hükmü ile bu hükmün uygulanmasına ilişkin Tebliğ kapsamında öngörülen düzenlemelerin, alacaklıların menfaatlerinin korunması bakımından etkileri tartışılmaktadır. Ayrıca ilgili hükümlerin, şirketlerin mali yapılarının güçlendirilmesi bakımından yeterlilikleri ve yerindelikleri, karşılaştırmalı hukuk düzenlemeleri de göz önünde bulundurularak eleştirel bir bakış açıyla ayrıntılı şekilde incelenmektedir. Creditors are the key to external financing sources for companies under the statute of joint stock companies, and hence represent an important figure interest group. This situation needs the effective supervision and protection of the company's creditors' interests. This is because the company's assets are the only source to which creditors can turn to acquire receivables. Hence, the loss or threatened loss of the joint stock company's assets because of its worsening financial situation is detrimental to the creditors' interests. This circumstance necessitates that the interests of the creditors of companies with a worsening financial situation be considered and that steps be taken in this respect prior to the realization of this danger, particularly with ex-ante protection opportunities. The corporate governance method strives to achieve the most equitable resolution of conflicts of interest between interest groups in joint stock companies. This thesis aims to provide a perspective on how the interests of company creditors, as an interest group, should be observed and protected in joint stock companies whose financial situation deteriorates or is at risk of deterioration, within the framework of the principles of transparency, fairness, accountability, and responsibility of corporate governance. From this perspective, to improve the financial situation of companies that have capital loss and become over-indebted, the effects of the provisions of TCC art.376 and the Communiqué, which are envisioned based on the principle of capital maintenance, are discussed in terms of protecting the interests of creditors. In addition, the adequacy and suitability of the relevant rules in terms of strengthening the financial structures of corporations are analysed in depth from a critical standpoint, considering the norms of comparative law.

6102 sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunu (TTK) ile Türk Ticaret Hukuku'nda özellikle anonim şirketler hukukunda yapılan değişiklikler arasında imtiyazlı paylarla ilgili düzenlemeler de bulunmaktadır. Mülga 6762 sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunundaki (eTK) hükümlere benzerlik gösteren yönleri olsa da imtiyazlı paylarla ilgili daha ayrıntılı, yenilikler getiren ve önceki Kanun döneminde karşılaşılan sorunları gidermeye çalışan düzenlemelerin yapıldığı görülmektedir. TTK'daki imtiyazlı paylarla ilgili düzenlemelerin eTK döneminde ortaya çıkan sorunları giderip gidermediğinin ya da yeni sorunlara, belirsizliklere ve tartışmalara yol açıp açmadığının tespit edilerek değerlendirilmesi amacı bu tezin yazılmasına sebep oluşturmaktadır. Birinci bölümde önce genel olarak pay kavramı, imtiyazlı payın tanınması koşulları, imtiyaz kavramının terminolojik yönü ve mevzuatımızda konuyla ilgili düzenlemelerle hukuk sistemimize esin kaynağı olan yabancı hukuk sistemlerindeki düzenlemeler incelenmiştir. Ardından, imtiyaz tanınan hakların, eşitlik ilkesi, müktesep hak ve vazgeçilmez hak ile olan ilişkilerine değinilmiş ve imtiyazlı pay kavramının nasıl tanımlanması gerektiği üzerinde durulmuştur. Tezin asıl omurgasını oluşturan ikinci bölümde, imtiyaza konu haklar, malvarlığı hakları ve yönetim hakları olarak iki asıl eksen üzerinde incelenmiştir. İkinci bölüm için en fazla tartışılmış bulunan konu, yönetim haklarında imtiyaza ilişkindir. Yönetim haklarında imtiyazı oluşturan iki alt başlık, oy hakkında imtiyaz ve yönetim kurulunda temsilde imtiyaz ayrıntılı bir şekilde incelenmeye çalışılmış, imtiyazın kanundan kaynaklanan nedenlerle engellenmesinden bahsedilmiş ve diğer haklarda imtiyaza değinilmiştir. Tezin üçüncü bölümü imtiyazların korunması konusuna ayrılmıştır. Bu bölümde imtiyazlı pay sahipleri özel kurulunun (İPSÖK) yapısı, niteliği ve toplanması ile özel kurulun onayına bağlı kararlar halka açık olan ve olmayan şirketler dikkate alınarak açıklanmıştır. Üçüncü bölümde ayrıca İPSÖK kararlarına karşı açılacak iptal davalarıyla ilgili değerlendirmeler yapılmıştır. It is observed that although there are some similarities with the previous one, the new Turkish Commercial Code, Law No: 6102, introduces more detailed and innovative arrangements which is intended to provide an answer to the problems experienced during the abrogated code was in force in relation to preference shares. It is easily can be said that, by and large, the topic "preference shares" is the one of the most radically altered topic in the new code. The main purpose of this thesis is to shed light whether these innovative arrangements in the new code actually solving the problems that is intended to solve or, rather opposite, causing new problems and ambiguities. For this purpose, the first section of this thesis is allocated to analyse the concept of "share" in general and under which conditions the preference shares are granted first and then the meaning of the concept of "preference" is investigated. It is followed by subsections devised to identify the current domestic law, and comprative law that inspried the law makers in this area. In the following subsections it is attempted to explain where preference shares stand with respect to principle of equality, vested interests and inalienable rights, and how the concept of preference shares should be defined. In the second section, which constitutes the backbone of this thesis, the rights that are being subject of the preference shares are examined on the axis of the assest rights and the administrative rights. The topic of the administrative rights attached to preference shares is the most debated topic in this section. In this context under the head of the administrative rights, the issues related to priveleges in votes and the representation on the executive board are examined seperately in two separate subsections. Also in this subsection the issues of statutory basis of the prevention of preferences and the preferences in relation to other rights are grappled. The third section of the thesis is completely devised to the issues related to the protection of the preference shares. In this section the structure, qualifications, gathering of the board of preference shares owners and the decisions subject to approval of this board are explained in the context of private and public companies. In this section the suits that could be brought for the annulment of this board decision is evaluated briefly.

Anonim şirketlerde yönetim veya temsil yetkisi kural olarak yönetim kurulu tarafından kullanılmakla birlikte, özellikle halka açık veya büyük ölçekli ortaklıklarda söz konusu yetkilerin tamamının yönetim kurulu tarafından bizzat yerine getirilmesi uygulamada sık rastlanan bir durum değildir. Bu nedenle kanunda, yönetim kuruluna, yönetim veya temsil yetkisinin 6102 sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunu' nun 367/I ve 370/II hükümlerinde yer alan şartlara uygun olarak, mevcut yönetim kurulu üyelerinden bir veya birkaçına yahut üçüncü kişilere devretmek suretiyle, şirketin yönetim teşkilatını belirleme yetkisi tanınmıştır. Şirket yönetimi konusunda uzmanlaşmış ve yeterli mesleki tecrübeye sahip olan kişilere yetkilerin devredilmesi, bir yandan şirkette profesyonelleşmeyi sağlamakta, diğer yandan kural olarak, devredilen yetkilerle birlikte bu kapsamda ortaya çıkabilecek hukuki sorumluluk da devredilmiş sayılacağından, yönetim kurulu üyelerinin hukuki sorumluluğunu sınırlandırmaktadır. Yönetim veya temsil yetkilerinin geçerli bir şekilde devredilmesi halinde, devredilen yetkilerle ilgili olarak yönetim kurulu üyelerinin hukuki sorumluluğu; murahhasların seçiminde, onlara verilecek talimatlarda ve murahhasların üst gözetiminde göstermeleri gereken makul derecede özen yükümlülüğü ile sınırlı olarak devam eder. Çalışmamızda, geçerli ve geçersiz yetki devri hallerinde, yönetim kurulu üyelerinin hukuki sorumluluğunun ne şekilde ortaya çıkacağı meselesi, mehaz İsviçre hukukundaki görüş ve yargı kararlarına yer verilmek suretiyle, detaylı bir şekilde incelenmiştir. Although the management or representation authority in joint stock companies is used by the board of directors as a rule, it is not common in practice that all of the said authorities are personally exercised by the board of directors, especially in publicly held or large-scale partnerships. For this reason, in the law, the board of directors is authorized to determine the management organization of the company by delegating the management or representation authority to one or more of the existing board members or to third parties in accordance with the provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code numbered 6102, 367/I and 370/II has been recognized. Delegation of powers to people who are specialized in company management and have sufficient professional experience, on the one hand, ensures professionalization in the company, and on the other hand, as a rule, legal responsibility that may arise in this context together with the delegated powers will be deemed to have been transferred, thus limiting the legal liability of the members of the board of directors. In case of a valid transfer of management or representation powers, the legal responsibility of the members of the board of directors regarding the delegated powers; limited to the reasonable care obligation that they must show in the selection of the executive directors, in the instructions to be given to them and under the supervision of the executive directors. In our study, the issue of how the legal responsibility of the members of the board of directors will arise in cases of valid and invalid delegation of authority has been examined in detail by including the opinions and judicial decisions in the Swiss law.

De sa création jusqu’à son terme, la société peut faire face à des interférences entre ses intérêts, d’une part, et les intérêts des associés, des dirigeants et des personnes auxquelles ils sont liés, d’autre part. En droit des sociétés, la genèse des conflits d’intérêts réside dans la volonté des associés et des dirigeants de privilégier leurs intérêts ou ceux d’une personne à laquelle ils sont liés, au détriment de l’intérêt social. Cette recherche a pour objectif de proposer une grille de lecture juridique renouvelée de la notion de conflit d’intérêts, articulée autour du préjudice et du devoir de loyauté. Elle met en évidence une méthodologie afin de définir le conflit d’intérêts en droit des sociétés. La présente étude identifie avec précision les mécanismes pratiques de détection, de prévention, de gestion, de sanction et de réparation des conflits d’intérêts.