股东派生诉讼问题研究

发布时间：2017-12-31 14:24

本文关键词：股东派生诉讼问题研究　出处：《河南师范大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：股东派生诉讼是我国的一项新型诉讼，是现代公司法中监督制约公司权力机关的一项重要法律制度。这一制度在弥补公司法中法人人格缺陷、保障中小股东合法利益、促进市场经济健康有序发展、维护社会和谐稳定等方面发挥着举足轻重的作用。我国2005年修订的《公司法》确立了股东派生诉讼制度，中小股东利用派生诉讼维护自身合法权益有了法律依据。但该制度中的概念解释具有较大的弹性空间，相关程序规定不具体、可操作性差，并且该制度在我国亦缺乏相关配套制度的支持，致使其在当前司法实践中显露出诸多弊端，中小股东权益未能得到有效保护。2013年，我国再次修订《公司法》，但股东派生诉讼制度问题并未涉及，我们仍需对该制度进行研究。本文分四部分，，分别从基本理论、国内外制度比较研究、我国现状分析以及提出我国股东派生诉讼制度完善建议等方面进行阐述。首先从股东派生诉讼制度概述及作用入手，介绍股东派生诉讼制度的内涵、历史沿革、作用；其次，通过对英国、美国、德国、日本等发达国家的诉讼相关程序及具体规定等进行阐述，以期在借鉴国外先进立法经验的基础上，完善我国的股东派生诉讼制度。再次，结合我国具体国情，指出现阶段我国股东派生诉讼制度在诉讼主体资格、前置程序、管辖规则、费用承担与激励和约束机制等方面存在的主要问题，致使中小股东通过提起派生诉讼维护合法权益阻力重重；最后，笔者衔接第四章，针对当前我国股东派生诉讼制度的不足，提出自己的构想，具体到诉讼主体资格、前置程序、管辖规则、费用承担与激励和约束机制的完善。在诉讼主体资格上建议进一步明确原告资格、扩大被告的范围至侵害公司利益的所有人；在前置程序上建议中小股东有条件地适用举证责任倒置程序；在管辖规则上建议将股东派生诉讼管辖区分为级别管辖和地域管辖，其中级别管辖由中级人民法院负责进行，地域管辖适用公司住所地法院管辖的原则；在诉讼费用承担上建议诉讼前在确定适当金额的基础上股东派生诉讼按件收取费用，诉讼后只要公司通过派生诉讼获得实质性的利益，就应对原告诉讼费用进行补偿；在激励和约束机制上建议建立股东派生诉讼的激励机制，同时健全约束机制。
[Abstract]:Shareholder derivative action is a new type of litigation in our country. It is an important legal system of supervising and restricting the power organ of company in modern company law. This system is making up for the defect of personality of legal person in the company law. Protecting the legal interests of minority shareholders, promoting the healthy and orderly development of market economy and maintaining social harmony and stability play an important role. In 2005, the Company Law was amended to establish the shareholder derivative litigation system. Minority shareholders use derivative litigation to protect their legitimate rights and interests on the basis of the law. But the concept of interpretation in this system has greater flexibility, the relevant procedures are not specific, the operability is poor. And the system in our country also lacks the support of relevant supporting systems, resulting in its current judicial practice revealed many shortcomings, the rights and interests of small and medium shareholders have not been effectively protected. 2013. Our country revised Company Law again, but the shareholder derivative litigation system is not involved, we still need to study this system. This paper is divided into four parts, respectively from the basic theory, domestic and foreign comparative study of institutions. This paper analyzes the present situation of our country and puts forward some suggestions for perfecting the shareholder derivative litigation system. Firstly, it introduces the connotation and historical evolution of the shareholder derivative litigation system from the overview and function of the shareholder derivative litigation system. Function; Secondly, through the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, Japan and other developed countries litigation procedures and specific provisions are elaborated, in order to learn from the experience of foreign advanced legislation on the basis. Third, combined with the specific conditions of our country, the author points out that the shareholder derivative litigation system in our country at the present stage in the qualification of the main body of litigation, leading procedures, jurisdiction rules. The main problems in the aspect of cost bearing and incentive and restraint mechanism cause the small and medium shareholders to defend their legitimate rights and interests through derivative litigation. Finally, the author converges to 4th chapter, aiming at the deficiency of the current shareholder derivative litigation system in our country, put forward his own idea, specific to the qualification of the main body of litigation, pre-procedure, jurisdiction rules. On the qualification of litigant subject, it is suggested that the plaintiff's qualification should be further clarified, and the scope of defendant should be expanded to the owner who infringes the interests of the company. It is suggested that minority shareholders should apply the procedure of inversion of burden of proof conditionally. In the jurisdiction rules, it is suggested that the jurisdiction of shareholder derivative action should be divided into hierarchical jurisdiction and territorial jurisdiction, in which the intermediate people's court is responsible for the jurisdiction, and the territorial jurisdiction should be applied to the principle of the jurisdiction of the court of the company's domicile. On the cost of litigation, it is suggested that the shareholder should collect the fee on the basis of determining the appropriate amount before litigation. After the lawsuit, only the company obtains substantial benefits through derivative action. To compensate the plaintiff for the costs of litigation; On the incentive and restraint mechanism, it is suggested to establish the incentive mechanism of shareholder derivative litigation and to perfect the restraint mechanism at the same time.
【学位授予单位】：河南师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D922.291.91

【参考文献】