The breach of trust<\/strong> is defined in article 314-1 paragraph 1 of the Penal Code<\/u> as the fact “to misappropriate, to the prejudice of another person, funds, values or any other property which has been given to him and which he has accepted on the condition that he gives them back, represents them or uses them in a specific way”<\/strong>.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n This offense thus presupposes, in advance, the handing over of a thing that has not been used for the purpose for which it was intended and ultimately the prejudice of the owner of the thing entrusted, who can no longer exercise his rights over it.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The offense of breach of trust is thus characterized as soon as the following are established :<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The traditional example of the offense is the misappropriation of a material thing<\/strong>, in particular following a loan for use: it could be, for example, the non-return of a vehicle at the end of a rental contract<\/strong>.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The traditional example of the offense is the misappropriation of a material thing, in particular following a loan for use: it could be, for example, the non-return of a vehicle at the end of a rental contract. Case law has long held that embezzlement of real estate (house, apartment, etc.) does not constitute a breach of trust. Sincea ruling by the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) on March 13, 2024<\/a>, it is now considered that the misuse of real estate, reflecting the intention of the person concerned to act as owner, does constitute a breach of trust. However, this ruling sets out a restrictive criterion: to be punishable, misuse of the building must “irreparably damage its usefulness”. A landlord who is the victim of an indelicate tenant will therefore often have to take civil action to have the tenant evicted<\/a>.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Article 314-1 of the Penal Code<\/u> punishes the breach of trust with 3 years of imprisonment<\/strong> and a fine of 375,000 euros<\/strong>.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The penalties are increased to 7 years’ imprisonment<\/strong> and a fine of 750,000 euros<\/strong> under Article 314-2 of the Criminal Code<\/u>, when the breach of trust is committed by a person who appeals to the public<\/strong> in order to obtain the delivery of funds or securities<\/strong> or by any other person who habitually engages in or assists, even as an accessory, in transactions involving the property of third parties<\/strong> or to the detriment of an association<\/strong> that appeals to the public for the collection of funds<\/strong> for humanitarian or social assistance<\/strong> or to the detriment of a vulnerable person<\/strong>.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The penalties<\/strong> are increased to a sentence of up to 10 years’ imprisonment<\/strong> and a fine of 1,500,000 euros<\/strong> under Article 314-3 of the Criminal Code<\/u>, when the breach of trust is committed by a judicial representative<\/strong> or by a public or ministerial officer<\/strong> either in the exercise of or in connection with the exercise of his functions, or by reason of his capacity.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Additional penalties may also be imposed in accordance with Article 314-10 of the Criminal Code<\/u> and the penalties provided for in Article 131-39 of the Criminal Code<\/u> may be incurred by legal persons.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Theft is the fraudulent taking of another’s thing.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Thus, theft and breach of trust are different<\/strong>, in that breach of trust is characterized by the misappropriation of a validly delivered thing, whereas theft is constituted by an appropriation of the property without prior delivery.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The distinction in principle is simple but in practice, the nuance is fine and is made case by case. In case of doubt, the victim filing a complaint will probably have interest to aim at both qualifications<\/strong>.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The distinction between breach of trust and fraud<\/strong> is essentially based on a temporal criteria<\/strong> of the action.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The breach of trust<\/strong> consists of fraudulent behavior subsequent<\/strong> to the delivery of the thing, whereas fraud<\/strong> is characterized by fraudulent behavior<\/strong> (deceitful maneuver) prior<\/strong> to the delivery of the thing. The breach of trust\u2019s statute of limitation is six years<\/strong>. This period can be interrupted by filing a complaint with civil action<\/a> or by a direct summons<\/a><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The statute of limitation<\/strong> traditionally starts from the date of commission of the offense<\/strong>. Nevertheless, when the offense is hidden or concealed, the starting point of the time limit is postponed until the day when the facts could be ascertained<\/strong> under conditions allowing the exercise of public action (See in particular the decision of the Court of Cassation of May 20, 2011, number 11-90.033<\/a>).<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Given the legal and procedural specificities of breach of trust<\/strong>, it is essential for the victim of the offense, as well as for the person suspected of having committed it, to be assisted by a criminal lawyer<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The latter will indeed be able to :<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The abuse of trust<\/strong> is a very specific concept : the misappropriation of another person’s property<\/strong> held on a precarious basis within the framework of a prior contract. Its applications, responding to the evolution of society, are very diverse.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"off","neve_meta_content_width":70,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","neve_meta_reading_time":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[81],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4350","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-criminal-law"],"yoast_head":"\n\r\n
What type of goods does breach of trust involve?<\/h2>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
For some years now, the offense has taken on a new scope<\/strong>, with the dematerialization of things misappropriated<\/strong>. It is indeed admitted that the misappropriated thing can be immaterial<\/strong> : for example, the information relating to the customers of a company ( Court of Cassation, criminal chamber, November 16, 2011<\/a>) or a bank card number<\/strong> (Court of Cassation, criminal chamber, November 14, 2000<\/a>).<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nThe repression of breach of trust<\/h2>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
How to distinguish between breach of trust and other property offenses ?<\/h2>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
\r\n
Breach of trust and theft<\/u> :<\/h3>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
\r\n
Breach of trust and fraud : <\/u><\/h3>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
The cumulation of qualifications<\/strong> of these two offenses can also be retained by the judge<\/strong> ( Decision of the Criminal Chamber of Cassation of May 24, 1983<\/a>).<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nWhat is the statute of limitation for breach of trust ?<\/h2>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
The criminal lawyer in cases of breach of trust<\/h2>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
\r\n