对赌协定效力之争及其评价

发布时间：2018-05-29 05:01

本文选题：估值调整机制 + 适格主体　；参考：《法律适用》2015年06期

【摘要】：估值调整协定是投融资双方因对融资企业估值不确定而产生的一种调整机制。由于这种估值的不确定性,投融资双方需要根据企业未来实际经营情况对当前企业估值及投资价格进行调整或修正,并在这种调整或修正中考虑约定条件不实现即"赌输"情况下的补偿安排。而这样的估值调整机制在实务中处于意思自治与合法合规的漩涡中,争议颇大。其中,融资公司能否成为适格的"对赌"主体、以上市作为"对赌"条件的估值调整协定是否有效,是较为突出的争议问题,均存在截然相反的两种不同观点。笔者认为,融资公司不应为"对赌"的有效主体;以上市为承诺目标的估值调整协定,只要具备合同有效要件即应认定其效力,相应的补偿条款不应属适用情势变更原则情形,应依约履行。
[Abstract]:Valuation adjustment agreement is a kind of adjustment mechanism caused by uncertain valuation of financing enterprises. Due to the uncertainty of this valuation, the investment and financing parties need to adjust or revise the current enterprise valuation and investment price according to the actual operation of the enterprise in the future. And in this kind of adjustment or amendment, the compensation arrangement is considered under the circumstance that the agreed conditions are not realized, that is, "gambling and losing". The valuation adjustment mechanism in practice is in the whirlpool of will autonomy and legal compliance, which is controversial. Among them, whether the financing company can become the appropriate subject of "gambling", and whether the valuation adjustment agreement with listing as the condition of "gambling" is effective or not is a more prominent issue, and there are two different viewpoints. The author thinks that the financing company should not be the effective subject of "gambling", that the valuation adjustment agreement of the above city as the target of commitment should be recognized as valid as long as it has the valid elements of the contract, and that the corresponding compensation clause should not be a case of applying the principle of change of circumstances. It should be carried out in accordance with the contract.
【作者单位】：上海铁路运输法院;上海高院民二庭;
【分类号】：D922.291.91;D923.6

【参考文献】