Analyse comparative du concept de malhonnêteté en droit criminel et en droit des sociétés
There presently is a problem regarding the comprehension of the concept of dishonesty relating to fraud. Fraud can be the result of deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means. This last notion is determined objectively, by reference to what a reasonable person would consider to be a dishonest act. Considering that the notion of dishonesty has no definition, a confusion exists especially when it cornes to economic crimes. Due to the fact that directors are compelled to respect an obligation of good faith and loyalty, we will refer to the general principles that exist in corporate law in order to define what can be qualified as dishonest behaviour. The first part is a summary of the general principals relating to corporate law. In fuis part we describe sorne behaviours which are considered as dishonest. From this analysis, we have come to the conclusion that dishonesty is understood as being an obstacle to the common project ofthe investors, and not in relation to property. The second part relates to criminal law. Some of the behaviours that were described as being part of other fraudulent means by justice McLachlin are analyzed. A reference to the general principles of corporate law is made when needed. Other offences like secret commissions and insider trading are also part of the analysis. Dishonesty pertaining to criminal law is described in relation to property. However, a lack of loyalty being also denounced, the notion of the best interest of the company, as in corporate law, remains relevant.
Directors Fraud Dishonesty Honesty Loyalty