“对赌协议”法律效力问题分析与制度建构

发布时间：2017-12-26 16:34

本文关键词：“对赌协议”法律效力问题分析与制度建构　出处：《中国政法大学》2017年博士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：最高法院的苏州海富公司案例与国际仲裁委员会案例对于对赌协议法律效力不同的裁判结果引发业界众多的争议,本文拟对对赌协议的法律效力问题与相关其他问题做探讨与研究,以期解决实践中“对赌协议”引起的法律适用问题。本文从私募股权投资与对赌协议的基本概念入手,首先介绍私募股权投资的四类参与主体,分析了私募股权投资具有非公开募集、股权投资、投资的退出方式的三个特点。接着介绍了对赌协议的来源与定义,根据对赌协议不同的特点将划分为不同的类型,并分析了融资需要与契约自由结合才产生了对赌协议,并对对赌协议的价值逐一分析,对于目前对赌协议的相关理论基础进行归纳与分析,用实证分析方法分析了我国关于对赌协议的经典案例的特点与法律适用,重点分析了对赌协议的法律关系。本文也分析了英美不会产生对赌协议法律效力问题的原因,一、英美法中合同法不存在效力问题概念,只要有邀约、承诺、对价、不违反公共利益,合同即成立。二、英美法的证券法公司法制度允许可转换优先股,可以优先分分红等,不违反法律规定,而中国没有这样的制度,才导致违反公司法而无效。三、英美法国家投资者大多数为机构投资者,具有专业律师对相关法律深入研究,不会使用这样明显违反法律的条款。通过对国内关于对赌协议效力问题对立观点的分析,归纳出通说认为投资者与融资方之间的对赌协议的法律效力是有效的,但是关于投资者与融资标的公司之间的对赌协议的法律效力,存在有效说与无效说两种观点。本文对于投资者与融资方之间的对赌协议进行了系统归纳,并用实证分析的方法对投资者与目标公司之间对赌合同分别持有效与无效两方的观点进行全面梳理与详细分析,指出各自理论存在的问题。目前各种分析均是拘泥于传统法学的观点而得出的结论,阐明对法律效力出现争议的根本原因是市场失灵、与合同法公司法等法律法规失灵的结果,是因为我国法律规定的局限性,不能适用市场经济变化的需要,面对市场失灵,应当发挥经济法的调整作用,提出用经济法学理念与基本原则重新审视对赌协议的效力问题。投资人与融资标的公司对赌本身不具有必然的违法性,并不必然损害公司其他股东的利益,并不必然会损害公司其他股东的利益。只有在融资标的公司承担责任后侵害其他债权人利益,与其他小股东利益才会导致无效。用经济法学的适度干预原则和社会本位原则作为审查对赌协议法律效力问题的原则,针对目前我国公司法、证券法的不足之处用经济法的基本理论提出了修改的观点,建议从行政监管、立法规制、和司法理念三方面对有关对赌协议的法律规定进行制度建构。
[Abstract]:The Supreme Court of Suzhou Haifu Company Committee case and international arbitration cases for the agreement on gambling legal effect of different judgment results sparked many disputes, this paper on the legal effect of the agreement on gambling problems and other related issues for discussion and research, in order to solve the problem of application of law in the practice of "agreement on gambling". Starting from the basic concepts of private equity investment and gambling agreement, this paper first introduces four types of participants in private equity investment, and analyzes three characteristics of private equity investment, including the ways of private offering, equity investment and investment exit. Then it introduces the origin and definition of the gambling agreement, according to the different characteristics of the agreement on gambling will be divided into different types, and analyzes the financing needs and the freedom of contract is the result of the combination of the gambling agreement and the agreement on gambling value analysis, the agreement on gambling related theory and summarized the analysis method, analysis of China's a classic case of VAM characteristics and the application of the law by empirical analysis, it focuses on the legal relationship of the gambling agreement. This paper also analyzes the reasons why the Anglo American Agreement does not produce the validity of the gambling agreement. First, the concept of the contract law does not exist in the Anglo American law. If there is an invitation, a commitment, a consideration, or a violation of the public interest, the contract is established. Two, Anglo American Law of the securities law, the company's legal system allows convertible preferred stock, dividends can be prioritize and so on, does not violate the law, but China has no such system, which can lead to violation of the company law and invalid. Three, most investors in Anglo American law are institutional investors, and have professional lawyers to conduct in-depth studies on related laws, so they will not use such a clear violation of the provisions of the law. Based on the analysis on the effectiveness of opposing views on the gambling agreement concluded at home, said that between investors and financiers of the legal effect of the agreement on gambling is effective, but on the subject of the company between the investors and the financing of the gambling agreement legal effect, effective said two views and invalid. In this paper, for between investors and financiers of the agreement on gambling were summarized, and with the empirical analysis for a comprehensive and detailed analysis of the contract between the investors and the Target Corp of gambling are holding valid and invalid two party views, points out their theoretical problems. At present all kinds of analysis are all adhere to the traditional view of law and the conclusion of legal effect causes controversy is market failure, failure of company law and contract law and other laws and regulations of the results, because of the limitations of the law of our country, need not apply to market changes, in the face of market failure, adjustment the economic law should play a role, put forward with the concept of economic law and the basic principles of re examining the effectiveness of the agreement on gambling problems. Investors and financing companies do not necessarily have illegality against gambling, and do not necessarily damage the interests of other shareholders. They will not necessarily damage other shareholders' interests. The interests of other creditors should be violated only after the company is responsible for the financing, and the interests of other small shareholders will be ineffective. With the principle of moderate intervention principle and the social standard of the economic law as a review of the effectiveness of the principle of legal gambling agreement, aiming at the shortcomings of company law and securities law of our country by using the basic theory of economic law puts forward views, suggestions on system construction of the relevant legal provisions of the gambling agreement from the administrative supervision, legislative regulation three aspects, and the judicial philosophy.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.6

【相似文献】