本文關(guān)鍵詞：股東派生訴訟問(wèn)題研究　出處：《河南師范大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 股東派生訴訟 主體資格 前置程序 管轄規(guī)則 費(fèi)用承擔(dān) 激勵(lì)和約束機(jī)制

【摘要】：股東派生訴訟是我國(guó)的一項(xiàng)新型訴訟，是現(xiàn)代公司法中監(jiān)督制約公司權(quán)力機(jī)關(guān)的一項(xiàng)重要法律制度。這一制度在彌補(bǔ)公司法中法人人格缺陷、保障中小股東合法利益、促進(jìn)市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)健康有序發(fā)展、維護(hù)社會(huì)和諧穩(wěn)定等方面發(fā)揮著舉足輕重的作用。 我國(guó)2005年修訂的《公司法》確立了股東派生訴訟制度，中小股東利用派生訴訟維護(hù)自身合法權(quán)益有了法律依據(jù)。但該制度中的概念解釋具有較大的彈性空間，相關(guān)程序規(guī)定不具體、可操作性差，并且該制度在我國(guó)亦缺乏相關(guān)配套制度的支持，致使其在當(dāng)前司法實(shí)踐中顯露出諸多弊端，中小股東權(quán)益未能得到有效保護(hù)。2013年，我國(guó)再次修訂《公司法》，但股東派生訴訟制度問(wèn)題并未涉及，我們?nèi)孕鑼?duì)該制度進(jìn)行研究。 本文分四部分，，分別從基本理論、國(guó)內(nèi)外制度比較研究、我國(guó)現(xiàn)狀分析以及提出我國(guó)股東派生訴訟制度完善建議等方面進(jìn)行闡述。首先從股東派生訴訟制度概述及作用入手，介紹股東派生訴訟制度的內(nèi)涵、歷史沿革、作用；其次，通過(guò)對(duì)英國(guó)、美國(guó)、德國(guó)、日本等發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的訴訟相關(guān)程序及具體規(guī)定等進(jìn)行闡述，以期在借鑒國(guó)外先進(jìn)立法經(jīng)驗(yàn)的基礎(chǔ)上，完善我國(guó)的股東派生訴訟制度。再次，結(jié)合我國(guó)具體國(guó)情，指出現(xiàn)階段我國(guó)股東派生訴訟制度在訴訟主體資格、前置程序、管轄規(guī)則、費(fèi)用承擔(dān)與激勵(lì)和約束機(jī)制等方面存在的主要問(wèn)題，致使中小股東通過(guò)提起派生訴訟維護(hù)合法權(quán)益阻力重重；最后，筆者銜接第四章，針對(duì)當(dāng)前我國(guó)股東派生訴訟制度的不足，提出自己的構(gòu)想，具體到訴訟主體資格、前置程序、管轄規(guī)則、費(fèi)用承擔(dān)與激勵(lì)和約束機(jī)制的完善。在訴訟主體資格上建議進(jìn)一步明確原告資格、擴(kuò)大被告的范圍至侵害公司利益的所有人；在前置程序上建議中小股東有條件地適用舉證責(zé)任倒置程序；在管轄規(guī)則上建議將股東派生訴訟管轄區(qū)分為級(jí)別管轄和地域管轄，其中級(jí)別管轄由中級(jí)人民法院負(fù)責(zé)進(jìn)行，地域管轄適用公司住所地法院管轄的原則；在訴訟費(fèi)用承擔(dān)上建議訴訟前在確定適當(dāng)金額的基礎(chǔ)上股東派生訴訟按件收取費(fèi)用，訴訟后只要公司通過(guò)派生訴訟獲得實(shí)質(zhì)性的利益，就應(yīng)對(duì)原告訴訟費(fèi)用進(jìn)行補(bǔ)償；在激勵(lì)和約束機(jī)制上建議建立股東派生訴訟的激勵(lì)機(jī)制，同時(shí)健全約束機(jī)制。
[Abstract]:Shareholder derivative action is a new type of litigation in our country. It is an important legal system of supervising and restricting the power organ of company in modern company law. This system is making up for the defect of personality of legal person in the company law. Protecting the legal interests of minority shareholders, promoting the healthy and orderly development of market economy and maintaining social harmony and stability play an important role. In 2005, the Company Law was amended to establish the shareholder derivative litigation system. Minority shareholders use derivative litigation to protect their legitimate rights and interests on the basis of the law. But the concept of interpretation in this system has greater flexibility, the relevant procedures are not specific, the operability is poor. And the system in our country also lacks the support of relevant supporting systems, resulting in its current judicial practice revealed many shortcomings, the rights and interests of small and medium shareholders have not been effectively protected. 2013. Our country revised Company Law again, but the shareholder derivative litigation system is not involved, we still need to study this system. This paper is divided into four parts, respectively from the basic theory, domestic and foreign comparative study of institutions. This paper analyzes the present situation of our country and puts forward some suggestions for perfecting the shareholder derivative litigation system. Firstly, it introduces the connotation and historical evolution of the shareholder derivative litigation system from the overview and function of the shareholder derivative litigation system. Function; Secondly, through the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, Japan and other developed countries litigation procedures and specific provisions are elaborated, in order to learn from the experience of foreign advanced legislation on the basis. Third, combined with the specific conditions of our country, the author points out that the shareholder derivative litigation system in our country at the present stage in the qualification of the main body of litigation, leading procedures, jurisdiction rules. The main problems in the aspect of cost bearing and incentive and restraint mechanism cause the small and medium shareholders to defend their legitimate rights and interests through derivative litigation. Finally, the author converges to 4th chapter, aiming at the deficiency of the current shareholder derivative litigation system in our country, put forward his own idea, specific to the qualification of the main body of litigation, pre-procedure, jurisdiction rules. On the qualification of litigant subject, it is suggested that the plaintiff's qualification should be further clarified, and the scope of defendant should be expanded to the owner who infringes the interests of the company. It is suggested that minority shareholders should apply the procedure of inversion of burden of proof conditionally. In the jurisdiction rules, it is suggested that the jurisdiction of shareholder derivative action should be divided into hierarchical jurisdiction and territorial jurisdiction, in which the intermediate people's court is responsible for the jurisdiction, and the territorial jurisdiction should be applied to the principle of the jurisdiction of the court of the company's domicile. On the cost of litigation, it is suggested that the shareholder should collect the fee on the basis of determining the appropriate amount before litigation. After the lawsuit, only the company obtains substantial benefits through derivative action. To compensate the plaintiff for the costs of litigation; On the incentive and restraint mechanism, it is suggested to establish the incentive mechanism of shareholder derivative litigation and to perfect the restraint mechanism at the same time.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河南師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 胡曉靜;;德國(guó)股東派生訴訟制度評(píng)析[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2007年02期

2 甘培忠;有限責(zé)任公司小股東利益保護(hù)的法學(xué)思考——從訴訟視角考察[J];法商研究;2002年06期

3 楊艷蘭;;我國(guó)股東派生訴訟制度之確立與完善[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年07期

4 胡煒;;股東派生訴訟激勵(lì)機(jī)制的完善[J];法制與社會(huì);2010年24期

5 蔣為群;論無(wú)獨(dú)立請(qǐng)求權(quán)的第三人[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年03期

6 翦繼志;;論我國(guó)股東派生訴訟制度的確立與完善——兼析新《公司法》第152條[J];貴州社會(huì)科學(xué);2006年04期

7 宋兆源;王清施;;中美股東派生訴訟制度比較研究[J];合作經(jīng)濟(jì)與科技;2010年22期

8 殷鑫;;論股東派生訴訟的訴訟費(fèi)用承擔(dān)[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)研究導(dǎo)刊;2009年09期

9 張敏;羅亞萍;;論公司在股東派生訴訟中的法律地位[J];學(xué)理論;2010年03期

10 曾培芳,盛建明;英國(guó)公司法中的派生訴訟初探──少數(shù)股股東權(quán)利的救濟(jì)之一[J];南京理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1999年03期

本文編號(hào)：1360155