Bibliographie sélective OHADA

De plus en plus, à travers le monde, il est demandé et attendu des entreprises d’aller au-delà de la seule finalité économique et financière au profit des associés et intégrer, entre autres, des considérations environnementales dans leurs décisions. Cette dynamique, est certes lente et timide, mais en construction dans le droit OHADA des sociétés commerciales. Ce droit reçoit implicitement les préoccupations environnementales. Il n’est donc pas totalement indifférent face à l’impérieuse nécessité de protection et de restauration de la nature. Or, l’environnement se vend et fait vendre. Il pourrait alors constituer un facteur de renforcement de l’attractivité du droit OHADA dans son ensemble et faire des sociétés commerciales des entités philanthropiques. L’intégration explicite des préoccupations environnementales dans le droit OHADA des sociétés serait alors requise. Elle accroitrait autant la compétitivité que la crédibilité des entreprises africaines au plan national et international. Increasingly, around the world, companies are being asked and expected to go beyond purely economic and financial objectives for the benefit of their shareholders and to integrate environmental considerations into their decision-making. This dynamic, while admittedly slow and tentative, is taking shape within OHADA business law. This law implicitly acknowledges environmental concerns. It is therefore not entirely indifferent to the pressing need to protect and restore nature. The environment is a marketable commodity and a driver of sales. It could thus become a factor in strengthening the attractiveness of OHADA law as a whole and transform businesses into philanthropic entities. The explicit integration of environmental concerns into OHADA business law would therefore be necessary. This would enhance both the competitiveness and the credibility of African companies at the national and international levels.

Les apports non capitalisables, en particulier l’apport en industrie, révèlent une difficulté majeure du droit des sociétés : intégrer dans le capital social des contributions immatérielles dont la valeur est essentielle, mais difficile à quantifier. À travers le « visage des apports non capitalisables émergé ». Cet article, analyse met en évidence les limites structurelles du régime actuel notamment l’absence de capitalisation, les difficultés d’évaluation, la participation restreinte de l’apporteur et l’insécurité juridique. Le « visage immergé », quant à lui, permettent ensuite d’identifier les perspectives d’évolution à l’instar de la valorisation accrue des contributions immatérielles, de la création de mécanismes d’évaluation adaptés, de la contractualisation des engagements et de la reconnaissance renforcée du rôle économique de l’apporteur en industrie. Parions, au final, que la modernisation de ce régime constitue une étape nécessaire pour aligner le droit des sociétés sur les standards de l’économie immatérielle contemporaine.

La norme est partout dans toute société : ce n’est pas parce qu’elle englobe tout comme l’auraient pensé les tenants du panjurisme, mais qu’elle se dissémine en bigarrant ses sources par l’effet de la privatisation de la création du droit. Les transfigurations rayonnantes du monde des affaires ont entraîné des mutations et des difformités profondes de l’environnement économique, social, juridique, entre autres. Cette transmutation a généré une nouvelle conception de la norme non coercitive, un glissement du droit dur vers un droit mou, influant significativement la gouvernance des entreprises. La réflexion centrée autour du droit mou, pris dans son déploiement au sein de l’entreprise privée, contribue à identifier justement les traits caractéristiques de ces normes, très souvent opposées aux dispositions du droit dur, même si l’on a tendance à minimiser l’intérêt de la distinction jugée filiforme, où les concepts s’entremêlent, se cumulent et se succèdent. La réception du droit mou en entreprise, œuvre, d’ailleurs, inachevée, est peu ou prou contrastée, en ce sens qu’il n’est pas réfutable que certaines composantes du droit souple soient reconnues comme faisant corps avec le droit, tandis que d'autres seraient désagrégées au droit dur. The norm is ubiquitous in every society, not because it encompasses everything, as proponents of panjurism might have thought, but because it disseminates itself by diversifying its sources through the privatization of lawmaking. The radiant transformations of the business world have led to profound mutations and distortions in the economic, social, and legal environment, among others. This transformation has generated a new conception of the non-coercive norm, a shift from hard law to soft law, significantly influencing corporate governance. Reflection focused on soft law, considered in its deployment within private enterprise, helps to precisely identify the characteristic features of these norms, very often contrasted with the provisions of hard law, even if there is a tendency to minimize the importance of this distinction, considered subtle, where concepts intertwine, accumulate, and succeed one another. The reception of soft law in business, a work which is, moreover, unfinished, is more or less contrasted, in the sense that it is undeniable that some components of soft law are recognized as forming part of the law, while others would be disintegrated into hard law.

Cette thèse propose une analyse renouvelée du contentieux des pactes d’associés en l’appréhendant comme un risque juridique structurel, et non comme une simple contingence factuelle. L’étude met d’abord en lumière la fonction particulière des pactes, entendus comme instruments de couverture de l’aléa social qui traversent le contrat de société. Les engagements qu’ils contiennent – mécanismes de transfert de droits sociaux ou stipulations permettant d’exiger un comportement – révèlent toutefois des fragilités propres, susceptibles de nourrir des contestations au moment de leur mise en œuvre. L’analyse systématise alors les voies de remise en cause possibles et montre que le risque contentieux dépend autant des mécanismes juridiques en cause que de la compétence des parties à activer ou non ce contentieux. Face à ce constat, la recherche élabore un modèle contractuel de traitement du risque contentieux, fondé sur la notion autonome de contrainte, exercée à destination des parties ou du juge. Par des techniques telles quel a renonciation, les prérogatives d’interprétation, les accords de qualification ou de régime, ce modèle permet d’anticiper et d’encadrer les contestations. Appliqué aux différents types d’engagements rencontrés dans les pactes d’associés, ce modèle démontre sa pertinence tout en révélant les frontières de la contractualisation. Il ne supprime pas toute possibilité de litige, mais permet d’en saisir la logique et d’en proposer un traitement structuré dès l’origine du contrat. This thesis offers a renewed analysis of litigation arising from shareholders’ agreements by approaching it as a structural legal risk, and not as a mere factual contingency. The study first highlights the particular functionof such agreements, understood as instruments for covering the social uncertainty that runs through the company contract. The commitments they contain – mechanisms for the transfer of shares or stipulations requiring a certain behaviour – nevertheless reveal their own fragilities, likely to fuel disputes at the time of their implementation. The analysis then systematises the possible avenues for challenge and shows that litigation risk depends as much on the legal mechanisms involved as on the parties’ ability to activate or not activate such litigation.In response to this observation, the research develops a contractual model for the treatment of litigation risk,based on the autonomous notion of constraint, exercised either towards the parties or towards the judge.Through techniques such as waiver, interpretative prerogatives, and qualification or regime agreements, this model makes it possible to anticipate and frame potential disputes.Applied to the different types of commitments found in shareholders’ agreements, this model demonstrates its relevance while revealing the boundaries of contractualisation. It does not eliminate all possibilities of litigation, but enables one to grasp its logic and to propose a structured treatment from the very origin of the contract.

Corporate law is in a moment of vibrant and contentious discussions about potential reforms. As firms exit Delaware, passive investment predominates, private equity expands, and public markets decline, corporate law faces a growing set of challenges that threaten its stability and efficacy. At the same time, the world faces pressing crises, including climate change, social and economic inequalities, and threats to democracy, though corporate law scholars typically consider these crises to be outside corporate law’s remit. In this Article, we argue that to understand and address the multidimensional crises that face both corporate law and society, we must address shortcomings in corporate law doctrine. We show how modern corporate law, shaped by neoclassical economic theories, provides an incomplete picture of the firm, and we propose an expanded theoretical perspective that draws from organization theory, a field long dedicated to understanding the complexities of the firm. This updated perspective demonstrates how firms actually consist of multiple constituents, including workers, the environment, and shareholders, who invest different forms of capital in the firm: labor capital, natural capital, and financial capital. It further shows that modern corporate law entrenches problematic power imbalances, privileging boards and insider shareholders over workers, the environment, and minority shareholders. Moreover, building on organization theory, we explain how corporate law fundamentally shapes and constrains firm behavior, leading these entrenched power imbalances to generate far-reaching negative consequences. To address these shortcomings, we propose redesigning board representation, fiduciary duties, and executive compensation to empower workers, the environment, and minority shareholders in relation to boards and insider shareholders. Integrating the organizational and economic perspectives can help address problematic power imbalances and ultimately provide a more effective corporate law framework to govern firms and serve society.

OHADA Law plays a crucial role in fostering economic growth and regional integration by harmonizing business regulations in the era of globalization and trade liberalization. This study examines the legal framework surrounding company membership under OHADA Law. While certain individuals such as legally incapacitated persons or those facing legal prohibitions cannot become company members, the law provides alternative solutions. The study explores the distinction between members and shareholders and clarifies the eligibility criteria for company membership. Using an analytical approach, this research finds that any natural or corporate entity, unless restricted by legal incapacity, prohibition, or incompatibility, can be a company member under OHADA Uniform Act. Furthermore, the law offers flexibility for incapacitated individuals by allowing legal representatives to act on their behalf.

Les pouvoirs et missions du commissaire aux comptes se sont accrus, allant de la mission principale de certification des comptes sociaux à des missions annexes d’information, de garantie d’égalité entre associés et de pérennité de l’entreprise. Au regard de l’importance de ce contrôleur légal, le législateur OHADA a, sous certaines conditions, généralisé sa présence dans les sociétés commerciales. Dans son office, il doit revêtir les vertus d’un contrôleur indépendant. Condition sine qua non de l’efficacité de sa mission, cette indépendance est consacrée par le législateur OHADA à travers notamment la prévention des situations possibles de dépendance et l’érection de certaines garanties préventives et curatives d’indépendance. Toutefois, un certain nombre de facteurs, résultant tant de la législation que de la pratique, sont potentiellement sources d’affaiblissement de cette indépendance recherchée, rendant nécessaire un meilleur renforcement afin de permettre à cet « organe supra social » de remplir pleinement sa mission de contrôle.

Whistleblower protection is necessary to reduce mismanagement in private and public organisations worldwide. The protection of whistleblowers is a complex and particularly challenging task that it is up to national authorities. The research methodology is the literature review. In this context, reputable scientific journals, reports from international organisations and websites dealing with the research field of whistleblowers are studied. The main conclusions are that there is an institutional framework for the functioning and protection of whistleblowers, but best practices are not fully implemented. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the use of whistleblowers is extremely high in detecting fraud and high public risks compared to other audit techniques. For this reason, the protection and framework of the whistleblower process is increasingly being legislated for by more and more countries as their importance is recognised. Finally, monitoring the use of whistleblowers and applying best practices and criteria for their effectiveness will make their use more effective.

Le chef d’entreprise qui, par sa faute, occasionne la défaillance économique de son entreprise, engage sa responsabilité. Sur quel fondement une telle responsabilité peut-elle être recherchée ? L’action en comblement du passif prévue à l’article 183 de l’acte uniforme relatif aux procédures collectives d’apurement du passif vise à engager la responsabilité pour insuffisance d’actif des dirigeants sociaux. Calque de la responsabilité civile de droit commun, la responsabilité pour insuffisance d’actif est engagée par la réunion du tryptique : faute de gestion, préjudice et lien de causalité. En cas de faute de gestion ayant contribué à l’insuffisance d’actif, les dettes de la personne morale seront supportées en tout ou partie, avec ou sans solidarité, par tous les dirigeants ou certains d’entre eux. Le tribunal dispose d’un pouvoir d’appréciation considérable lui permettant de décider de celui ou de ceux des dirigeants qui supporteront le passif ainsi que du montant supporté. Toutefois, celui-ci ne peut être supérieur au montant de l’insuffisance d’actif. La procédure collective peut même être étendue au dirigeant qui n’a pas acquitté le passif créé par sa faute. Il s’agit donc d’une responsabilité spéciale, dérogatoire de la responsabilité civile de droit commun.

La propriété et le pouvoir entretiennent un lien très étroit dans la mesure où les détenteurs du capital social, en leur qualité de propriétaires, s’illustrent généralement par leur propension à vouloir exercer le pouvoir au sein de la société commerciale dont la majorité des titres sociaux sont détenus, à vouloir diriger, administrer, contrôler la société. Le législateur OHADA permet de rompre un tel lien en offrant la possibilité de désigner des dirigeants qui n’ont pas la qualité d’associé ou même des tiers en qualité d’administrateurs. Il y a donc une volonté manifeste de dépatrimonialisation du pouvoir : les associés, propriétaires, ne sont plus nécessairement détenteurs du pouvoir décisionnel au sein de la société. Les associés minoritaires ou commanditaires sont quasiment insignifiants dans le fonctionnement de la société dont les grandes orientations sont décidées par les associés majoritaires ou les associés commandités, alors qu’ils ont tous sans exception, participer à la constitution du capital social.

In this Article, I analyze the expanding common law doctrine of shareholder ratification, whereby shareholder approval can, for all practical purposes, absolve directors of fiduciary liability for their conflicted business decisions. Delaware law now allows a shareholder vote to perform substantially more work than ever before. Under prevailing doctrine, in transactions between a company and any party other than a controlling shareholder, shareholder ratification reinstates the business judgment rule and makes it irrebuttable, other than for waste. Substantive judicial review is effectively avoided for such transactions. Despite its extraordinary importance in corporate governance, the shareholder ratification doctrine’s foundations are feeble and its limits uncertain. Theoretically, there is no well-established basis for equating shareholder approval with either the informed, disinterested, and good-faith decision of a board or judicial review. Doctrinally, shareholder ratification’s expansion beyond its traditional context of self-dealing has been a judicial innovation, rather than an elaboration of precedent. And historically, the shareholder ratification doctrine, which originated in early 20th-century state interesteddirector statutes, was motivated by fairness principles that were lost in translation into the common law. This Article recovers the fairness genealogy of the shareholder ratification doctrine and, in doing so, provides useful guidance for the doctrine’s development, limits, and future application.

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.

This article examines corporate governance in Africa and its significance for corporate repurposing. It relies on the framework of the Organisation for the Harmonisation of Business Law in Africa (OHADA), which unites seventeen African states under one corporate law jurisdiction while exploring how the interpretation and practice of this legal system can be integrated with or influenced by national sectoral laws and cultural norms. The workings of these different legal sources denote the case for heterodox pluralism of corporate purpose, whereby corporate membership is not tethered to shareholding only, but the workforce and neighbouring too and corporate legitimacy is not merely a function of legal arrangements but equally derives from broader society. The governance of corporations in Africa must correspond to such imperatives to ensure that the prevailing shareholder primacy norm does not continue its unencumbered de facto reign and reduce African stakeholderism to comparative impotence and mere scholarly exercise.

Environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues have gained prominence in recent years. Companies have come to understand their role in the global economy and that their decisions cannot be based solely on profits. They are now required to have regard for the environment in which they operate, to be mindful of the social factors that affect their employees, customers and the community at large, and to ensure that their corporate governance complies with the standards set out in the Companies Act 71 of 2008 and the various King Reports. While ESG has become a buzz word in the corporate world, there is still much uncertainty among stakeholders about what they are required to do and what the reporting requirements, if any, are. Its implementation in South Africa is still in its infancy and there is much uncertainty about what ESG monitoring and compliance truly entail. A perfect illustration of this is the fact that the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) only published ESG disclosure guidelines for the first time in 2022. This means that until the guidelines were published, hundreds of companies in South Africa had been wondering aimlessly in the dark when it comes to ESG issues. To make matters worse, while environmental issues and corporate governance issues have received significant attention from scholars and legislators in South Africa alike, the "S" in ESG has received little attention. It is often treated as the undesirable stepchild that everyone conveniently forgets is part of the ESG family. The purpose of this study is to highlight the gaps in the existing ESG regulatory framework, which leads to gaps in the understanding and monitoring of the implementation of the social indicators of ESG. The study aims to firstly determine whether companies in South Africa have a proper understanding of the social framework of ESG and whether the current legal and/or regulatory framework in South Africa offers sufficient guidance to n organisations to ensure that they comply with and fully implement the social guidelines of the ESG framework.

6102 sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunu m. 531'de anonim şirketin özel sona erme hallerinden biri olarak haklı sebeplerle fesih düzenlenmiştir. Bu düzenleme ile 6762 sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunu döneminde anonim şirketin haklı sebeple feshinin mümkün olup olmadığı yönündeki tartışmalar sona ermiş ve anonim şirketin haklı sebeple feshi kurumu hukukumuza kazandırılmıştır. Anonim şirketin haklı sebeple feshi, haklı sebeplerin varlığı durumunda, sermayenin en az onda birini ve halka açık şirketlerde yirmide birini temsil eden pay sahipleri tarafından istenebilir. Anonim şirketin haklı sebeple feshi davası şirket merkezinin bulunduğu yer asliye ticaret mahkemesinde açılır. Kanunda anonim şirketin haklı sebeple feshinde haklı sebep kavramı tanımlanmamış ve haklı sebep teşkil edebilecek durumlara örnek gösterilmemiştir. Kanun gerekçesinde bu kavramın niteliklerinin gösterilmesinin ve tanımlanmasının yargı kararları ve doktrine bırakıldığı belirtilmiştir. İleri sürülen sebeplerin haklı sebep olarak kabul edilip edilmemesi mahkemenin takdirindedir. Yargılama sonucunda mahkemenin şirketin feshine, davacı pay sahiplerinin paylarının değerinin ödenerek şirketten çıkarılmasına veya uygun düşen ve kabul edilebilir diğer bir çözüme karar verme yetkisi bulunmaktadır. Çalışmamız kapsamında anonim şirketin haklı sebeple feshinde haklı sebep teşkil edebilecek durumlar incelenmiştir. Bu inceleme yapılırken kanun metni ve gerekçesi, doktrinde ileri sürülen görüşler ve yargı kararları ile çalışmamız desteklenmiştir. Article 531 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 regulates the dissolution of a joint stock company for just cause as one of its special grounds for termination. With the introduction of this provision, the debates regarding whether the dissolution of a joint stock company for just cause was possible under the period of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6762 have been resolved, and the institution of dissolution of a joint stock company for just cause has been incorporated into our legal system. The dissolution of a joint stock company for just cause may be requested by shareholders representing at least one-tenth of the capital, or one-twentieth in publicly traded companies, in the presence of just causes. The lawsuit for the dissolution of a joint stock company for just cause is filed in the commercial court where the company's head office is located. The law does not define the concept of "just cause" in the context of the dissolution of a joint stock company, nor does it provide examples of situations that might constitute just cause. According to the legislative intent, the determination and definition of the characteristics of this concept are left to judicial decisions and legal doctrine. Whether the reasons presented are accepted as just cause is at the discretion of the court. Following the trial, the court has the authority to decide on the dissolution of the company, the payment of the value of the shares to the plaintiff shareholders in exchange for their exit from the company, or another suitable and acceptable solution. This study examines situations that may constitute just cause for the dissolution of a joint stock company for just cause. In this analysis, the text and rationale of the law, views expressed in legal doctrine and judicial decisions have been taken into account.