Introduction

Matrix organization

Mergers by absorption

Risks related to the expansion of the scope of criminal liability of legal entities

Validity conditions

Proof of delegation

Exemption from individual liability of delegator

Attribution of offense to legal entity

Delegations of authority

Criminal risk management within business organizations

Complicity in crimes against humanity

Breaches of secrecy

Personal data breaches

Theft

Extortion

Blackmail

Fraud

Misappropriation

Receiving/concealment of unlawfully obtained property (recel)

Attacks on automated data processing systems

Money laundering

Misappropriation by public official (concussion)

Corruption and influence peddling

Unlawful acquisition of an interest

Favoritism

Forgery and use of forgeries

Violation of Criminal Code

Offenses under the Monetary and Financial Code

Offenses under the Commercial Code

Environmental Code violations

Offenses arising from other codes

Types of offenses

Offenses under the Criminal Code, the Commercial Code, or the Environmental Code, Criminal procedure

White Collar Crime (en cours)

The offense of concussion by a public official constitutes an intent-based offense , which requires that the perpetrator demands or orders payments they know are not owed, or exceed what is due . Thus, in the absence of establishing bad faith or intent to harm, a tax administration official cannot be blamed for dismissing a document they deemed insufficiently probative .
However, the moral element …

Moral element

The offense of concussion by a public official constitutes an intent-based offense , which requires that the perpetrator demands or orders payments they know are not owed, or exceed what is due . Thus, in the absence of establishing bad faith or intent to harm, a tax administration official cannot be blamed for dismissing a document they deemed insufficiently probative .

However, the moral element of the offense of corruption by a public official can be inferred from the materiality of the facts. This is the case for the director of a social security fund, who necessarily knew that the amounts received were not due, as the prefect had denied him the benefit of a higher index , or the tax inspector who grants reductions over several years to several taxpayers, without complying with the formalities imposed by his superiors and known to him . The offense can also result from a willful omission as long as the existence of an illegal advantage is established .

Furthermore, the courts consider, as a criterion for assessing the intentional element, the professional status of the defendant, since, given this status, the defendant could not have been unaware of committing an offense. This is the case for the mayor, a legal professional, who knowingly ordered and collected undue revenues for the benefit of a municipal public institution , the police officer who participated in the increase of his monthly salary, as he could not have been unaware of the undue nature of some of his earnings , the president of a chamber of trades and crafts, whose attention was regularly drawn by various questions raised during general meetings by administrators concerned about the allowances and mission expenses of elected officials , or the local elected official who has sufficient experience to act knowingly .

Finally, a subsequent act, such as the reimbursement of amounts considered as overpayments, cannot call into question the intentional element , unless it involves an erroneous interpretation of the law or regulation by the public official , or in the case of a factual error, provided it is not obvious, and is committed unintentionally and without bad faith .

Cass. crim. 10 September 2008, LawLex202200003306JBJ, finding malicious intent; Cass. crim., 5 May 1999, LawLex202200007439JBJ, which dismisses corruption by a public official (concussion) due to lack of fraudulent intent.

Cass. crim., 17 December 2014, LawLex202200010079JBJ.

Cass. crim., 13 March 1995, LawLex202200010070JBJ; Cass. crim., 7 December 2022, LawLex202300001491JBJ.

Cass. crim., 13 June 2007, LawLex202200010072JBJ; such an error cannot thus be upheld when, despite a change in regulation, it is proven that the defendant understands its scope Cass. crim., 30 March 1999, LawLex202200003302JBJ.

Cass. crim., 13 March 1995, LawLex202200010070JBJ.

Cass. crim., 13 March 1995, LawLex202200010070JBJ; Cass. crim., 17 December 2014, LawLex202200010079JBJ.

Cass. crim., 24 October 2001, LawLex202200003304JBJ.

Cass. crim., 20 May 2015, LawLex202200003307JBJ.

Cass. crim., 10 October 2012, LawLex202200003299JBJ; Cass. crim., 16 November 2011, LawLex202300001482JBJ.

Cass. crim., 16 May 2001, LawLex200300001127JBJ.

Cass. crim., 4 May 1979, LawLex202300001500JBJ.

Cass. crim., 15 December 2010, LawLex202200010077JBJ; see Cass. crim., 29 June 2016, LawLex202200003308JBJ, for the director of a URSSAF when it is due to these criminal acts that he was able to take early retirement leave before his retirement date.

Cass. crim., 7 December 2022, LawLex202300001491JBJ.

White Collar Crime (en cours)

113. Moral element

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

113. Moral element

Demandez un accès gratuit au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise