“In everything we must consider the end” (La Fontaine, The fox and the goat), in its sense of purpose.
The purpose of using preventive procedures is to seek an agreement with the aim of ensuring the sustainability of the company. To do this, they are driven by a philosophy which “is based on a subtle blend of confidentiality and selective transparency. The two notions – contradictory at first glance – turn out to be decisively complementary. Responding to this desire, the law of July 26, 2005 on business protection created article L. 611-15 of the commercial code. The preparatory work and parliamentary debates relating to this text were innervated by the key notion of confidentiality” (S. Doray, BJE Jan. 2016, no. 112z7).
The obligation of confidentiality entails a prohibition on disclosing information relating to the preventive procedure, whether it concerns its very opening and its content, and both by the person subject to a duty of confidentiality and by a third party. Consequently, journalists (Com. Dec. 15, 2015, no. 14-11.500, Dalloz Actualité, Dec. 17, 2015, obs. A. Lienhard; D. 2016. 1894, obs. P.-M. Le Corre and F .-X. ; Rev. societies 2016. 193, obs. P. Roussel Galle ; Légipresse 2016. 12 and obs.
This judgment is therefore a continuation of this praetorian construction consisting of defining the legally imprecise contours of the perimeter of confidentiality, with an ever more extensive approach.
Under the provisions of Article L. 611-15 of the Commercial Code, “any person who is called to the conciliation procedure or to a mandate for this or who, through their functions, has knowledge of it and is bound by confidentiality.”
This jurisprudential construction began in 2015 with a confrontation of the notion of confidentiality and that of freedom of expression. The obligation of confidentiality entails a ban on disclosing information relating to the mandate procedure for this – la solution…
Related News :