公司担保中相对人的审查义务——基于最高人民法院裁判分歧的分析和展开

发布时间：2018-05-18 13:07

本文选题：公司担保 + 越权规则　；参考：《政法论坛》2017年05期

【摘要】：效力性和管理性强制性规定的区分并不能涵盖私法上的越权规范,就公司法定代表人越权担保,也就不应从公司法第16条的规范性质出发,简单地认定未经公司内部决议的担保合同的效力。公司法第16条是对公司法定代表人代表权限的法定限制,不宜以民法总则第61条第3款关于法定代表人代表权的约定限制不得对抗善意相对人的规定为依据,否定相对人的审查义务。相对人对于法定代表人的代表权限负有审查义务,以确定公司法定代表人是否超越代表权限,为避免加重相对人的审查负担、节约交易成本、权衡各方利益,实现公司法第16条的立法目的,相对人对公司章程、公司内部决议等仅负形式审查义务。相对人未尽到形式审查,应当知道法定代表人超越代表权限,未经公司追认,担保合同对公司不生效力,就相对人所受损失由法定代表人和相对人依其过错进行分担。
[Abstract]:The distinction between mandatory provisions of validity and management does not cover ultra vires norms in private law, nor should the normative nature of Article 16 of the Company Law be taken into account with regard to the ultra vires guarantee of the legal representative of a company. Simply determine the validity of a guarantee contract without an internal resolution of the company. Article 16 of the Company Law is the legal limitation of the right to represent the legal representative of the company, which should not be based on the stipulation of the agreement on the representation of the legal representative in Article 61, paragraph 3, of the General provisions of the Civil Law, which shall not counter the provisions of the bona fide counterpart. Negate the relative party's obligation to examine. The counterpart shall have the obligation to examine the representative authority of the legal representative in order to determine whether the legal representative of the company exceeds the authority of the representative, in order to avoid aggravating the examination burden of the relative party, saving the transaction cost, and balancing the interests of all parties, In order to realize the legislative purpose of Article 16 of the Company Law, the relative party has only the obligation of formal examination to the articles of association and the internal resolutions of the company. If the relative party fails to do the formal examination, it should know that the legal representative exceeds the authority of the representative, and the guarantee contract has no effect on the company without the recognition of the company, and the legal representative and the relative party shall share the losses suffered by the relative party according to their fault.
【作者单位】：中国人民大学民商事法律科学研究中心;中国人民大学法学院;
【基金】：中国人民大学科学研究基金(中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助)研究品牌计划基础研究项目“中国民法典担保法立法研究”(17XNI001)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D922.291.91

【相似文献】