股东派生诉讼之诉讼结构研究

发布时间：2018-05-27 07:41

本文选题：股东派生诉讼 + 诉讼结构　；参考：《中国政法大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 股东派生诉讼制度起源于英美国家的衡平法,后各国纷纷于立法中确立该制度。我国在2006年新《公司法》实施之前,立法中一直没有股东派生诉讼制度的规定,这一立法空白给我国司法实践带来很多困难。正是意识到股东派生诉讼制度在中小股东利益保护等方面具有的现实意义,我国终于在新《公司法》中规定了股东派生诉讼制度。然而,对股东派生诉讼进行研究的时候,不能忽略的是股东派生诉讼制度毕竟是诉讼方式的一种,制度本身的落实最终还是要回归到诉讼程序中来,这就需要在程序法规范中作出相应的调整以使实体法与程序法相协调。因此在对股东派生诉讼的发展历史及现实意义进行简单介绍后,本文试图将股东派生诉讼制度放到程序性规范之下进行深层次的理论及具体制度的探讨。本文以股东派生诉讼之诉讼结构为主线,从诉讼结构要素的广度、诉讼结构要素的深度、诉讼结构构建的理念等方面,阐述股东派生诉讼在具体制度及制度背后的理论支撑上与普通民事诉讼制度相较有哪些方面的变革。诉讼结构要素主要包含当事人及法院,诉讼结构要素的变革,主要指当事人范围的扩大及当事人限制性要求的加深,正因股东派生诉讼诉讼结构要素的特殊性,传统的当事人理论是否能够对该制度进行解释?本文将有详细的论述。股东派生诉讼诉讼结构构建理念的不同,首先在于股东派生诉讼的适用可能产生的极端,即或泛滥或沦为空文。为了防止这种极端的产生,有必要在构建该诉讼结构时,利用经济利益为杠杆,平衡激励机制和防御机制。股东派生诉讼制度体现了国家司法对于公司自治权的干预,这就会存在一个限度的问题,因此平衡公司自治权和国家司法干预权又成为必要。由于股东派生诉讼在以上诸多方面的特性,在诉讼结构样态上较之传统的民事诉讼结构样态又会有何不同?本文也会做一个浅析;而在论述过程中,本文会有意识的对国外先进的立法经验进行介绍;最后自然而然得出结论,即在法律移植和借鉴过程中,不能只见树木不见森林,对某一制度片面理解、僵化引入,而应该全面把握,这样才能构建起和谐的法律体系。
[Abstract]:The system of shareholder derivative action originated from the equity law of Anglo-American countries. Before the implementation of the new Company Law in 2006, there was no shareholder derivative litigation system in our legislation, which brought a lot of difficulties to the judicial practice of our country. Realizing the practical significance of the shareholder derivative litigation system in the protection of the interests of minority shareholders, China has finally stipulated the shareholder derivative litigation system in the new Company Law. However, when studying the shareholder derivative litigation, what can not be ignored is that the shareholder derivative litigation system is after all a kind of litigation mode, and the implementation of the system itself should eventually return to the litigation procedure. In order to harmonize substantive law with procedural law, it is necessary to adjust the rules of procedural law accordingly. Therefore, after a brief introduction of the history and practical significance of shareholder derivative litigation, this paper attempts to put the shareholder derivative litigation system under the procedural norms for a deep theoretical and specific system discussion. This article takes the litigation structure of the shareholder derivative litigation as the main line, from the aspects of the breadth of the elements of the litigation structure, the depth of the elements of the litigation structure, the concept of the construction of the litigation structure, etc. This paper expounds the reform of shareholder derivative action in the specific system and the theoretical support behind the system compared with the ordinary civil litigation system. The elements of litigation structure mainly include the parties and the courts. The reform of the elements of the litigation structure mainly refers to the expansion of the scope of the parties and the deepening of the restrictive requirements of the parties, which is due to the particularity of the elements of the shareholder derivative litigation structure. Can the traditional party theory explain the system? This article will be discussed in detail. The difference of the concept of construction of shareholder derivative litigation is that the application of shareholder derivative action may produce extreme, even overflow or become empty text. In order to prevent this extreme, it is necessary to balance the incentive mechanism and defense mechanism by using economic interests as leverage when constructing the litigation structure. The shareholder derivative litigation system reflects the interference of the state judicature to the company autonomy, which will have a limited problem, so it is necessary to balance the company autonomy with the state judicial intervention. Because of the characteristics of shareholder derivative litigation in the above aspects, what is the difference between the litigation structure and the traditional civil litigation structure? This paper will also do an analysis; and in the process of discussion, this paper will consciously introduce the advanced legislative experience of foreign countries; finally, naturally come to the conclusion that in the process of transplanting and drawing lessons from the law, we can not only see the trees without the forest, In order to construct a harmonious legal system, the unilateral understanding of a certain system and the introduction of ossification should be comprehensively grasped.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D922.291.91

【相似文献】