股东分红权保护研究

发布时间：2018-07-25 16:52

【摘要】：股东分红权，即股东股利分配请求权，作为股东一种自益性财产权利，其能否实现不但取决于公司是否存在盈余利润，还在于公司的意思表示。公司的股利分配意思表示属于公司自治的范畴，股东应尊重公司董事或者高管的商业判断。但是不容忽视的是，公司的控股股东可以通过利益输送来掏空公司利润，，也可以利用自己控制力不正当地达成不分红或者少分红的决议。股东分红权遭受侵害的股东尽管可以通过转让股份的方式来回应这种不正当的行为，但投资者财产利益的损失往往难以挽回。这无疑会影响投资者的信心，进而波及资本市场的健康发展。于是系统地研究股东分红权保护体系显得尤为重要。股东分红权是投资者基于股东资格所享有的请求公司向自己支付盈余利润的权利。它可以划分为抽象的股东分红权和具体的股东分红权。具体股东分红权在本质上是一种债权，其的保护按照债权法规定处理，不存在争议。但对于抽象股东分红权而言，无论是在性质上和行使条件方面，与具体股东分红权不一样。通过厘清股东分红权的基本理论可以为后续的研究打下一个坚实的基础。另外，股东分红权保护的依据是股利分配“矫正正义”的需要，也是不公平待遇救济理论的反映，亦是受信义务的要求，更是资本市场压力的使然。通过我国公司股利分配的现状可以清晰地看出股东分红权难以实现的障碍。在我国阻碍股东分红权实现的因素不但有公司内部监督机制不完善问题，且有公司外部的政府作为不恰当问题。在公司内部监事会往往只是起到“橡皮图章”的作用，独立董事难以独立；在公司外部政府的税收政策不合理以及证监会的监管措施需要进一步检讨。针对股东分红权的内部实现机制，建议提倡股东积极主义，协调监事和独立董事之间关系，激发监事会的监督职能，改进独立董事的选任、薪酬以及责任追求等制度；至于股东分红权的外部实现机制——政府监管问题，应该说政府介入上市公司股利分配是必要的，但从以往政府介入公司股利分配的实践来看，政府监管需要进一步改进：政府应该谨慎的保持应有的距离，不至于模糊公司自治与政府管制之间的边界。公司股东分红权的司法救济，是除了公司内部监督机制和外部政府监管之外，保护股东分红权的另一个重要措施。其作为股东分红权最后的保护手段，重要性不言而喻。但司法救济股东分红权，无论是在司法实践中还是理论上，都存在巨大争议。司法救济应该尊重公司自治，也应尊重董事或者高管的商业判断。不过对于恶意或者不正当的股利分配行为，国外司法实践启示着我们：司法救济不仅不应被否定，而应成为解决此问题的措施。
[Abstract]:As a kind of self-beneficial property right, the realization of shareholder's right of dividend distribution depends not only on whether the company has surplus profit, but also on the expression of company's intention. The meaning of dividend distribution of a company belongs to the category of corporate autonomy, and shareholders should respect the business judgment of directors or executives of the company. However, it can not be ignored that the controlling shareholders of the company can empty the company's profits through the transmission of benefits, and can also improperly reach the resolution of no dividends or less dividends by using their control power. Although shareholders who have suffered from the infringement of shareholders' dividend rights can respond to this improper behavior by transferring shares, the loss of investors' property interests is often irreparable. This will undoubtedly affect the confidence of investors, and then affect the healthy development of the capital market. So it is very important to study the protection system of shareholders'dividend right systematically. Shareholder's right of dividend is the investor's right to ask the company to pay surplus profit to himself on the basis of shareholder's qualification. It can be divided into abstract shareholder dividend right and specific shareholder dividend right. The specific shareholder's right to dividend is essentially a kind of creditor's right, and its protection is dealt with according to the creditor's rights law, and there is no dispute. However, for the abstract shareholder's dividend right, it is different from the specific shareholder's dividend right in nature and exercise conditions. By clarifying the basic theory of shareholder dividend right, we can lay a solid foundation for further research. In addition, the basis for the protection of shareholders' right to dividends is the need of "corrective justice" in dividend distribution, the reflection of unfair treatment relief theory, the requirement of fiduciary obligation, and the pressure of capital market. Through the present situation of dividend distribution in our country, we can clearly see the obstacle that shareholders' dividend right is difficult to realize. The factors hindering the realization of shareholders' dividend right in our country are not only the imperfect internal supervision mechanism of the company, but also the improper problem of the government outside the company. The board of supervisors often acts as a "rubber stamp" within the company, with independent directors struggling to be independent; the government's tax policies outside the company are unreasonable and the SFC's regulatory measures need to be further reviewed. In view of the internal realization mechanism of shareholders' right to share out dividends, it is suggested to advocate shareholder activism, to coordinate the relationship between supervisors and independent directors, to stimulate the supervisory function of the board of supervisors, and to improve the system of selection, compensation and responsibility pursuit of independent directors. As for the external realization mechanism of shareholders' dividend right, that is, government supervision, it should be said that it is necessary for the government to intervene in the dividend distribution of listed companies, but from the practice of government intervention in dividend distribution of companies in the past, Government regulation needs to be further improved: governments should be careful not to blur the border between corporate autonomy and government regulation. In addition to the internal supervision mechanism and external government supervision, the judicial remedy of shareholders' right to share out dividends is another important measure to protect shareholders' right to share out dividends. As the last protection means of shareholder's dividend right, its importance is self-evident. However, the right of judicial relief shareholder dividend, whether in judicial practice or in theory, there is a huge controversy. Judicial remedies should respect corporate autonomy and the business judgment of directors or executives. However, for malicious or improper dividend distribution behavior, foreign judicial practice enlightens us: judicial remedy should not be denied, but should be a measure to solve this problem.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D922.291.91

【相似文献】