股东会决议不成立制度研究

发布时间：2018-12-29 21:08

【摘要】：股东会决议不成立制度属于公司法上决议瑕疵救济体系的一部分，其调整的是公司决议程序有严重瑕疵的情形。股东会决议瑕疵包括内容瑕疵和程序瑕疵，无论股东会决议出现何种瑕疵，都可能对股东的利益造成损害，因此，各国公司立法都确立了决议瑕疵的救济体系，为因决议有瑕疵而利益受损的股东提供法律救济，保护公司股东的合法权益。关于决议瑕疵的救济体系，有的国家规定了决议无效之诉、决议可撤销之诉以及决议不存在之诉，对于司法实践中出现的决议瑕疵的效力纠纷实现了细致、明确的调整，如日本、韩国等。其中决议不存在之诉即是本文所要探讨的决议不成立之诉。还有一些国家仅规定了决议无效之诉和决议可撤销之诉，对于决议不成立之诉未作规定，但学说和判例上却认为有确立决议不成立制度的必要，如德国、中国及我国台湾地区。本文试图运用实证分析和比较分析的研究方法，针对决议不成立制度进行探讨，认为我国应该引入这一制度，以满足司法实践的需要，完善我国公司决议瑕疵的救济体系。除引言外，全文分为五个部分，共约两万字。第一部分为案例介绍及问题的提出，通过对“刘华与华泉等股权转让、公司决议纠纷上诉案”这一案例的介绍，反映出我国司法实践对决议不成立制度的需要，引出本文的论题。第二部分为决议不成立制度相关理论概述，主要介绍了决议不成立制度的适用情形、决议不成立的法律后果、决议不成立的救济以及决议不成立制度的制度价值。通过对决议不成立制度的理论介绍，反映出它和决议无效制度、决议可撤销制度的区别，以及其所具有的制度价值。第三部分以实际案例为例证，分析了我国相关立法的不足。我国《公司法》对于公司决议程序有瑕疵的情形，仅规定了决议可撤销制度，没有根据程序瑕疵程度的不同进行区分调整。司法实践中，决议程序有严重瑕疵的案件，并不能完全得到妥当的调整，反映了相关立法的不足。本部分以几个较具代表性的案件为例证，，说明我国相关立法存在的问题。第四部分为域外比较，介绍了日本、韩国、德国及我国台湾地区有关决议不成立制度的立法、学说与判例，以期从域外的相关经验中获得启示，为我国立法和司法实践中相关问题的解决提供帮助。第五部分为对策建议，针对我国相关立法的不足，结合决议不成立制度的制度功能及域外经验，提出了自己的建议。最高人民法院民二庭于2010年拟定的《关于适用中华人民共和国公司法若干问题的规定（四）（征求意见稿）》对于决议不成立的情形进行了调整，本部分还对此《征求意见稿》进行了评价。
[Abstract]:The system of shareholders' non-establishment is a part of the remedy system of resolution defects in company law, which adjusts the situation of serious defects in the procedure of company resolution. The defects of shareholders' resolutions include content defects and procedural defects. No matter what kind of defects appear in the shareholders' resolutions, they may cause harm to the interests of shareholders. Therefore, the company legislation of various countries has established the remedy system for the resolution defects. To provide legal relief for shareholders whose interests are damaged by defective resolutions, and to protect the legitimate rights and interests of shareholders of the company. With regard to the relief system of resolution defects, some countries have stipulated the action of resolution invalidity, resolution revocable action and resolution non-existence action, which have made a detailed and definite adjustment to the dispute of the validity of the resolution defect that appears in judicial practice. Such as Japan, Korea and so on. The action of resolution without existence is the action of resolution that is discussed in this paper. There are still some countries that only stipulate the action of invalid resolution and revocable action of resolution, but do not stipulate the action of resolution that is not established, but the doctrine and the precedent think that it is necessary to establish the system of invalid resolution, such as Germany, China and Taiwan area of our country. This article attempts to use the empirical analysis and comparative analysis of the research method to discuss the system of resolution not established, and think that our country should introduce this system to meet the needs of judicial practice and perfect the remedy system of the defect of the company resolution in our country. In addition to the introduction, the full text is divided into five parts, a total of about 20,000 words. The first part is the introduction of the case and the questions, through the introduction of the case of "Liu Hua and Hua Quan equity transfer, the appeal case of the company resolution dispute", which reflects the need of the judicial practice of our country for the resolution not to be established. Lead to the topic of this paper. The second part is an overview of the relevant theories of the unestablished resolution system. It mainly introduces the application of the non-established resolution system, the legal consequences of the resolution not established, the relief of the resolution not established and the institutional value of the non-established resolution system. Through the theoretical introduction of the unestablished system of resolution, it reflects the difference between it and the invalid system of resolution, the system of resolution revocability, and the institutional value of the system. The third part takes the actual case as an example, analyzes the insufficiency of the relevant legislation of our country. The Company Law of our country only prescribes the resolution revocable system for the cases where the company resolution procedure is defective and does not distinguish and adjust according to the degree of procedural defects. In judicial practice, the cases where the procedure of resolution is seriously flawed can not be adjusted properly, which reflects the deficiency of relevant legislation. This part takes several representative cases as an example to illustrate the problems existing in the relevant legislation of our country. The fourth part is the extraterritorial comparison, introducing the legislation, doctrine and jurisprudence of the relevant resolutions of Japan, South Korea, Germany and Taiwan, in order to obtain enlightenment from the relevant experiences abroad. To provide help to solve the related problems in our country's legislation and judicial practice. The fifth part is the countermeasure suggestion, aiming at the insufficiency of the relevant legislation of our country, combining with the system function and the outside experience of the resolution not to establish the system, put forward own suggestion. The provisions on the Application of the Company Law of the people's Republic of China (4) (draft for opinions) formulated by the second Chamber of the people's Court of the Supreme people's Court in 2010 have adjusted the situation in which the resolution is not established. This part also evaluates this draft for comments.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D922.291.91

【参考文献】