公司法任意性规范研究

发布时间：2018-01-18 05:26

  本文关键词：公司法任意性规范研究　出处：《吉林大学》2017年博士论文　论文类型：学位论文

  更多相关文章： 公司法 任意性规范 司法裁判 政府干预

【摘要】：本文以公司法任意性规范为研究对象,以我国公司法发展与改革为背景,运用公司契约理论以及市场经济理论,综合运用实证分析、比较研究、经济分析等方法,反思当下我国公司法制存在的问题。结合司法程序,从理论建构和制度建设出发,研究公司法任意性规范的理论价值、制度建设以及保障机制。本文写作遵循以下步骤:首先对公司法任意性规范进行理论探讨;其次对公司法制度作实证研究;再次提出保障公司任意性规范实施的机制。自由是公司法理论研究的主题,自由价值以公司法任意性规范为载体。公司法任意性规范是自治性私法规范,当事人意思优先于国家意志。公司法任意性规范可以由当事人选择、变更或排除适用。基于公司法的私法属性,其任意性规范之配置情况,在一定程度上决定了公司运行之效率。本文运用公司契约理论路径解读公司法,认为任意性规范应为公司法之基本规范,公司法应当是权利保障法而非管制型法律。在探讨公司法任意性规范的类型时,本文借鉴了国外学者Ian Ayres和Robert Gertnert提出的理论。认为公司法任意性规范应当以自动适用与非自动适用的任意性规范为主要构成部分。从公司契约理论出发,基于效率的考量,以人文主义和自由主义为基础,本文认为:在公司法规范目的确认方面,强制性规范除了保障公司法任意性规范的实施不应有其他目的;在规范内容设置方面,公司法强制性规范应当注重对公司参与方诉权的规定,侧重于对公司法参与方行使权利的程序性规定;在规范逻辑方面,公司法强制性规范应当建立起这样一种逻辑,即任何公司法强制性规范之设置,应当能够证明其强制之合理性。本文通过实证的方法,以公司市场准入制度和一人公司制度为例,探讨公司法任意性规范发展的趋势。公司市场准入制度包括公司设立制度和公司资本制度。公司设立的本质,乃国家控制权与商人自治的博弈。通过研究我国以及世界主要国家和地区关于公司设立规范的发展,其规范呈逐步放松的过程。公司法规范大体上遵循着从强制性规范向任意性规范发展的轨迹。公司资本制度是指由法律规定的在公司成立及运营过程中,公司资本发行、缴付、维持、减少的制度。公司资本制度的改革不仅体现了一国经济政策导向的变化,更影响着大众投资兴业的意愿。法律对公司资本制度的规定,划分着政府强制与企业自治的边界。债权人保护是公司资本制度设置的理由。但是随着资本信用功能的弱化,资本规制方式发生了变化。通过对公司资本制度的实证分析,公司资本制度的发展整体上也符合公司法规范体系整体由强制性向任意性规范发展的轨迹。一人公司制度超越了公司的团体性,其赋予公司主体更大的灵活性。在法制发展方面,一人公司经历了从禁止到限制的过程,整体上仍遵循增加公司法任意性规范的发展规律。但是当下对一人公司仍存在不必要的限制,本文认为保护一人公司债权人不足以构成对一人公司限制的理由,应当进一步增加公司法任意性规范之规定。对公司法任意性规范的研究不应仅局限于《公司法》本身,还需结合《证券法》以及证监会制定的规范性文件。我国上市公司以遵循《证券法》以及证监会所制定的规范性文件为主。这造成了公司规范的双轨制:普通公司更多的参考公司法规则,上市公司更多的参考证券法规则。以上市公司股东大会职能为例,两种不同的法律体系所内涵的价值是不同的,于此造成了公司治理实践的摇摆。本文认为,无论是公众公司还是闭锁公司,公司治理、公司经营主要是私人领域,应当以任意性规范为主要的行为依据。在规范体系方面,应当协调证券法规范与公司法规范,以设置公司法任意性规范的方式对证券法涉及公司自治领域的问题进行吸收。本文对公司法任意性规范的研究既包括对立法之反思,也包括对司法之建议。回顾我国司法在经济发展中的历史,存在以司法替代立法的做法。因此司法制度应当回归其权利救济程序的本质。在公司法任意性规范保障方面,国家干预和市场机制缺一不可,国家干预应当遵循有限干预的原则,市场机制应当发挥基础作用。应当对当下我国的控制权市场、职业经理人市场和资本市场进行改革,遵循市场竞争的指导思想,充分发挥市场定价的作用。同时联结司法程序与市场之间的关系,结合公司纠纷审判程序,本文提出应当以司法能动主义为指导,重塑裁判逻辑,并完善股东诉讼的立法规定。
[Abstract]:According to the company law standard of arbitrariness as the research object, in our company law reform and development as the background, using the corporate contract theory and market economic theory, analysis, comprehensive use of empirical comparative study, economic analysis, reflection on current company legal problems. Combined with the judicial process, starting from the theoretical construction and the system construction, theoretical value of the study of company law arbitrary norms, system construction and protection mechanism. This paper follow the following steps: firstly, discusses the theory of company law of arbitrary norms; secondly makes an empirical research on the system of company law; the company once again put forward the safeguard mechanism of arbitrary norms implementation. Freedom is the theme of the theory of company law the value of freedom as the carrier, in order to standardize the company law. The company law of any arbitrary norms is the autonomy of private law, the parties prior to the will of the state. Any justice Specification can be chosen by the parties, change or exclude it. Private property company law based on the arbitrary norms of the configuration, to a certain extent determines the efficiency of corporate operation. This paper uses the contract theory path of the interpretation of the company law, that arbitrary norms should be the basic norms of company law, company law should be the law on the protection of rights and non control law. In the study of company law and arbitrary standards, this paper use Ian Ayres and Robert Gertnert foreign scholars put forward the theory of company law. That arbitrary norms should be applied automatically and non arbitrary norms applicable to automatic main components. Starting from the theory of corporate contract, efficiency based on the consideration, the humanism and liberalism as the basis, this paper holds that in company law standard to confirm, in addition to the protection of the mandatory norms of company law and arbitrary standards The implementation should not have other purposes; in setting the standard content, the mandatory norm of the company law should pay attention to the provisions of the company to participate in the Party of the right to appeal, focusing on company law party to procedural rights stipulated in the specification; logic, mandatory rules of law should establish such a logic, that is to set any corporate mandatory the standard, should be able to prove that the compulsory rationality. Through empirical methods, the company in the market access system and the system of one-man company as an example, to explore the development of the company law the specification of any trend. The market access system including the establishment of company system and company capital system. The essence of the establishment of the company, but the state control and game merchants autonomous. Through the development of research in China and the world's major countries and regions on the company to establish the standard, the standard is gradually relaxed. The corporation law Generally follow from the mandatory norms to arbitrary norms. The trajectory of company capital system refers to the legal provisions in the company set up and operation of the process, the company issued capital, pay, maintain, reduces the system. The reform of company capital system not only reflects the change of a country by economic policy orientation, but also affect the public investment will. Legal provisions of company capital system, divide the boundaries of government compulsory and corporate autonomy. The protection of creditors of the company capital system is set for. But with the weakening of credit capital, changes in capital regulation. Through empirical analysis of the capital system, the overall development of the capital system of the company on the whole system in line with the development of the company law by compulsion to arbitrary norms. The trajectory of one person company system beyond the group of companies, which gives the company the main body More flexibility. In the development of legal system, one company has experienced from prohibition or restriction on the whole process, follow the law of development of the company law is still increasing. But the arbitrary norms of one person companies still exist unnecessary restrictions, this paper argues that the protection of creditors of one-man company does not constitute a limit the reason, should further increase the provisions of the company law. The arbitrary norms of company law and arbitrary standards should not be limited to the "company law" itself, still need to be combined with the Securities Law > and commission to develop normative documents. The normative documents of our country listed companies to follow the securities Law > and < the commission established. This caused double track company specifications: rule company more reference to company law, listed companies more reference to the securities law rules. The function of shareholders' meeting of listed companies as an example, two different The legal system of the connotation of value is different, this caused the swing the practice of corporate governance. This paper argues that, whether it is a public company or close corporation, corporate governance, the main operating company is the private sector, should be based on the arbitrary norms of behavior as the main basis. In the standard system, should coordinate with securities laws and company the law, involving the company autonomous domain of Securities Law of company law to set arbitrary norms of the way of absorption. The study of company law and arbitrary standards both in legislation reflection, also includes the judicial review of China's judicial suggestions. In the economic development history, existing in judicial alternative legislation practice. Therefore the judicial system should be return to nature of their rights. The relief procedure in the company law specification of any security, both state intervention and market mechanism, government intervention should follow The principle of limited intervention, the market mechanism should play a basic role. It should be on the current control of the market, occupation manager market and capital market reform, follow the guiding ideology of market competition, give full play to the role of market pricing. At the same time, the relationship between the judicial process and the connection of the market, combined with the company's dispute trial procedure, is proposed in this paper. Should be based on judicial activism as a guide, to reshape the referee logic, legislation and perfection of shareholder litigation.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.291.91
，

本文编号：1439652