Abstract
The problem of the current civil law in the field of corporate law is the lack of several legal concepts, and therefore the concepts of “corporate conflict” and “corporate dispute” are used as synonyms. This article makes a distinction between these concepts and defines the distinguishing features. To achieve this goal, the article used such methods as the dogmatic method, the method of comparison and generalization. Corporate conflict arises from corporate disagreements, which in the future may develop into a corporate dispute. The substitution of the concepts of “corporate conflict” and “corporate dispute” in the same semantic meaning as synonyms is defined as a lexical error. Corporate conflict is a violation of the rights and (or) interests of the participants of the corporation and related relations. The category of corporate conflict is a generic concept, while the concept of corporate dispute is a specific one. A corporate dispute is defined as a significant violation of the corporate rights and (or) the interests of the participants of the corporation, as well as related relations, including membership and management of the corporation, the resolution of which is possible only in court. Thus, the concept of “corporate dispute” cannot be used in return or equal to the concept of “corporate conflict”.