A leader who signs a contract, validates an invoice, or deploys a new digital tool is making a legal decision each time. No need for a dispute to realize this: a tax audit, a poorly drafted statutory clause, or a forgotten formalities at the registry can lead to consequences. The legal news this fall 2026 confirms this reality with several reforms that directly impact the daily management of companies.
AI in the workplace and the obligation to consult the CSE
You allow your teams to use a public artificial intelligence tool, accompanied by an internal charter. This gesture may seem trivial. However, it can trigger a legal obligation that many leaders are unaware of.
According to Le Village de la Justice (September 2026), the introduction of an AI tool requires prior consultation with the CSE, even when it involves software already available on the market. The qualification adopted by the judges does not distinguish between custom development and the authorization of an existing service. As soon as the tool modifies working conditions or surveillance methods, the social and economic committee must be informed and consulted.
Decision-makers who regularly follow the legal section of Le Blog des Décideurs will find this type of regulatory alert explained in an accessible format, allowing for anticipation rather than reaction after the fact.
At the same time, the issue of criminal liability of leaders related to AI is gaining momentum. The stakes are no longer theoretical: a lack of regulation can personally engage the leader.
Electronic invoicing: what the September 2026 phase changes concretely
Since September 1, 2026, large companies and mid-sized enterprises must issue their invoices via an approved platform. This timeline was known, but its practical effects are less so.
Electronic invoicing is not limited to sending a PDF. It requires a structured format, a traceable validation circuit, and real-time transmission of transaction data to the tax administration. For the leader, this means reviewing three internal processes:
- The validation circuit for outgoing invoices, which must now go through the chosen dematerialization partner platform.
- Internal control over mandatory mentions, as a rejection by the platform blocks issuance and can delay collection.
- Continuous tax compliance, since the administration receives the data without waiting for the VAT declaration.
SMEs and micro-enterprises are not yet subject to the issuance obligation, but they will need to receive electronic invoices. Anticipating technical compliance avoids facing the change at the last moment.
Dutreil Pact: a tightening affecting business transmission
Transferring your business to your children or a family buyer with a tax advantage is the principle of the Dutreil Pact. The finance law for 2026 has restricted this scheme.
The partial exemption from transfer duties no longer covers certain assets not allocated to operational activity. Specifically, if the company (or one of its controlled subsidiaries) holds patrimonial assets with no direct link to the operation, these assets are excluded from the benefit of the exemption.
Why does this point deserve your attention? Because many family holdings own real estate or financial investments within subsidiaries. Before 2026, these elements could benefit from the Dutreil allowance if the company was generally classified as operational. This is no longer automatic.
Check the asset composition of each entity
A leader preparing a transfer must now audit the nature of the assets held by each subsidiary. The analysis is no longer conducted solely at the level of the parent holding. Each layer of the family group may contain a disqualifying element.
A Dutreil Pact signed before the reform is not necessarily called into question, but any transfer operation initiated after the entry into force of the 2026 finance law must incorporate this new framework.
Statutory preemption clauses: the risk of cancellation of share transfers
When a partner sells their shares without respecting the preemption right stated in the bylaws, the classic sanction was a claim for damages. Recent case law trends have tightened the tone.
Failure to comply with a preemption clause now exposes the transfer to outright cancellation. For the leader, the consequence is direct: a poorly framed capital operation can be undone months after its completion, with cascading effects on governance and power distribution.
Secure share transfers in advance
Before any transfer, three reflexes can help limit the risk:
- Review the bylaws and the shareholders’ agreement to identify all applicable preemption, approval, or joint exit clauses.
- Formally notify each shareholder entitled to the preemption right, respecting the required formalities (registered letter, response time).
- Document the refusal or waiver of each beneficiary before finalizing the transfer, to have an opposable proof.
These steps may seem elementary. In practice, they are often overlooked, especially in structures where partners know each other well and proceed informally.
Company law in 2026 is characterized by a tightening of requirements on old mechanisms (Dutreil, preemption) and the emergence of new constraints related to digital (AI, electronic invoicing). For a leader, the common thread remains the same: every operational decision has a legal dimension, and neglecting it costs more than addressing it in advance.
