论非基于公司决议的盈余分配请求权的司法保护

发布时间：2018-07-30 06:22

【摘要】：股东盈余分配请求权是股东重要的权利之一,从公司获得利益是股东投资设立公司最终的目的。2016年4月12日最高人民法院公布了关于适用《中华人民共和国公司法》若干问题的规定(四)的征求意见稿,其中第二十条规定股东请求分配利润的,应当提交载明具体分配方案的股东会或者股东大会的决议,否则法院应当驳回其诉讼请求。问题是当股东会或者股东大会作出不分配利润的决议或者没有作出有关分配利润的决议时,对盈余分配请求权受到损害的股东如何保护却没有规定。股东盈余分配请求权,是指股东在公司有利润可分配时,基于其公司股东的资格和地位而享有的请求公司向自己分配利润的权利。我国的理论界的通说认为其有两方面的内容,即抽象层面和具体层面。抽象层面的盈余分配请求权是股东基于其股东资格和地位而享有的权利,只要股东拥有该公司的股东资格和地位就可以请求该公司向其分配红利。具体层面的盈余分配请求权,是指股东是否有权请求公司向其分配利润取决于其是否有股东会或者股东大会作出的盈余分配分配决议。法院往往对抽象的盈余分配请求也就是股东(大)会分配决议缺失时持消极态度。其理由是要尊重公司自治,抽象盈余分配请求权性质特殊,而且受损股东可以寻求其它的替代性救济方式。但是法院在尊重公司自治时也要遵守法律的公平正义原则,抽象盈余分配纠纷是有可诉性的,对受损股东权益保护的最好办法不是寻求替代措施,而是构建强制盈余分配制度。强制盈余分配制度是股东依法要求公司向其分配利润时,公司以过分提取任意公积金为理由拒绝或者不给任何理由直接拒绝,此时,权益受到损害的股东请求法院强制公司向其分配利润的救济方式。强制盈余分配制度保护的公司类型应包括有限责任公司和非上市股份有限公司。条件是公司有可供分配的利润,公司不分配利润无正当理由,且受损股东已穷尽内部救济。提起盈余分配诉讼的原告是受损股东,被告是董事、控股股东、公司,按照谁主张谁举证原则,由原告承担举证责任,如果原告滥用权利,对公司造成的损失,应承担赔偿责任。至于具体应判决的盈余分配额,法院可以在专业机构的协助下,结合具体案件,在最高盈余分配额和最低盈余分配额之间做出具体数额的判决。
[Abstract]:The shareholder's right to claim for the distribution of earnings is one of the important rights of shareholders. The ultimate purpose of establishing a company by shareholders is to obtain benefits from the company. On April 12, 2016, the Supreme people's Court published a draft for soliciting opinions on the application of certain issues in the Company Law of the people's Republic of China. Article 20 stipulates that where a shareholder requests a distribution of profits, he shall submit a resolution of the shareholders' meeting or the shareholders' general meeting setting out the specific distribution plan, otherwise the court shall reject the application. The problem is that when the shareholders' meeting or the shareholders' general meeting makes a resolution on the non-distribution of profits or does not make a resolution on the distribution of profits, there is no provision on how to protect the shareholders whose claim for the distribution of earnings is impaired. The claim right of shareholders' earnings distribution refers to the shareholders' right to ask the company to distribute profits to themselves on the basis of the qualification and status of shareholders when the company has profits to be distributed. The general theory of our country holds that there are two aspects of it, namely, abstract level and concrete level. The claim of earnings distribution in abstract level is the right of shareholders based on the qualification and status of shareholders, so long as the shareholders have the qualification and status of shareholders of the company, they can ask the company to distribute dividends to them. The specific level of claim for earnings distribution refers to whether the shareholders have the right to ask the company to distribute the profits to it depending on whether it has a resolution on the distribution of earnings made by the shareholders' meeting or the shareholders' general meeting. Courts tend to take a negative view of abstract earnings allocation requests, that is, shareholder (large) allocation decisions are missing. The reason is to respect corporate autonomy, abstract earnings allocation claim is of a special nature, and damaged shareholders can seek alternative remedies. However, the court should also abide by the principle of fairness and justice when respecting the autonomy of the company. Abstract surplus distribution disputes are actionable. The best way to protect the rights and interests of the injured shareholders is not to seek alternative measures, but to construct a compulsory surplus distribution system. The compulsory surplus distribution system is when shareholders require a company to distribute profits to it according to law, the company refuses to take excessive withdrawal of any provident fund as a reason or refuses to give any reason directly. At this time, The way in which shareholders whose rights and interests have been harmed request the court to force the company to distribute profits to it. The types of companies protected by the compulsory earnings allocation system should include limited liability companies and non-listed companies. The condition is that the company has distributable profits, that the company does not distribute profits without justification, and that the damaged shareholders have exhausted internal remedies. The plaintiff who brings the action for the distribution of surplus is the injured shareholder, the defendant is the director, the controlling shareholder, the company, according to the principle of who proclaims the proof, the plaintiff shall bear the burden of proof. If the plaintiff abuses his right and causes losses to the company, Be liable for compensation. As for the specific amount of surplus allocation to be adjudicated, the court may, with the assistance of a professional institution and in the light of a specific case, make a judgment of a specific amount between the maximum surplus allocation and the minimum surplus allocation.
【学位授予单位】：延边大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D922.291.91

【相似文献】