發(fā)布時間：2018-03-19 10:22

  本文選題：公司董事　切入點：注意義務(wù)　出處：《西南財經(jīng)大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：注意義務(wù)是公司董事承擔(dān)的重要義務(wù)之一。在現(xiàn)代公司由“股東(大)會中心主義”轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)椤岸聲行闹髁x”的世界趨勢下,董事在公司中處于極為重要的地位。長期以來,基于對董事濫用權(quán)力的憂慮,我國學(xué)界和實務(wù)界在對公司治理問題的研究中,普遍傾向于強化董事的義務(wù)和責(zé)任。本文認為,強化董事義務(wù)和責(zé)任與減輕董事的風(fēng)險和壓力應(yīng)當(dāng)是完善董事責(zé)任制度的兩個方面,目前的這種趨勢,僅僅關(guān)注了完善董事責(zé)任制度的一個方面,而并未從減輕董事的風(fēng)險和壓力出發(fā)來關(guān)注董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟制度。 本文重點從維護公司經(jīng)營的健康發(fā)展、減輕董事的風(fēng)險和壓力出發(fā),對我國公司董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟制度的完善進行了討論。 全文除導(dǎo)論和結(jié)論外,共分為三個部分： 第一部分：董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟的基本問題：理論考察。首先從法律的公平價值、公司法的私法性質(zhì)、董事受信托人的法律地位三個方面出發(fā),闡述了董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟的法理基礎(chǔ)；其次從平衡我國公司法對公司和股東利益的過度保護、彌補我國公司法對董事實施救濟的明顯不足、鼓勵董事在商業(yè)活動中積極作為三個方面出發(fā),闡述了我國公司董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟的現(xiàn)實必要性,進而為我國公司董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟制度的完善奠定理論和現(xiàn)實基礎(chǔ)。 第二部分：董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟途徑：域外比較。從英美法系和大陸法系各選擇一有代表性的國家,即美國和日本,對兩國的董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟途徑進行了較為系統(tǒng)的域外考察和比較分析。明確了董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟制度的完善必須從本國的現(xiàn)實需要出發(fā),以本國法律傳統(tǒng)和經(jīng)濟、文化、社會背景為基礎(chǔ)來建構(gòu)。 第三部分：我國公司董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟：路徑選擇。從我國的實際情況出發(fā),對美日兩國的董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟途徑進行了分析,并對我國公司董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟制度的完善提出了如下建議：①在構(gòu)建我國公司董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟制度時,美國法院援用的商業(yè)判斷規(guī)則免除董事責(zé)任制度和董事費用補償制度目前移植于我國尚不具有必要性,同時否定了美日兩國的董事會決議免除董事責(zé)任制度在我國的適用；②我國《公司法》應(yīng)當(dāng)明確提出可以對董事違反注意義務(wù)所產(chǎn)生的民事責(zé)任進行救濟,同時應(yīng)規(guī)定實施救濟的行為要件,即主觀上必須是善意且無重大過失,客觀上必須是董事執(zhí)行職務(wù)的行為；③我國法律應(yīng)當(dāng)完善異議董事的責(zé)任免除制度、完善我國的董事責(zé)任保險制度、引入國外基于公司自治的董事責(zé)任免除制度,同時提出了具體的完善和引入的建議措施；④我國法律應(yīng)當(dāng)借鑒日本的做法,對特殊類型董事的責(zé)任救濟做出特別規(guī)定,包括對獨立董事和對職工董事的責(zé)任救濟分別做出特別規(guī)定。 本文的主要創(chuàng)新是：①對我國公司董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟的路徑進行了系統(tǒng)的梳理,打破了目前相關(guān)研究中僅介紹某一項制度的做法,構(gòu)建了我國公司董事注意義務(wù)違反之法律救濟制度的“三層次”架構(gòu),即明確對董事實施救濟的一般法律條件、規(guī)定一般董事責(zé)任救濟的具體路徑、對特殊類型董事責(zé)任救濟做特別規(guī)定。②打破了目前國內(nèi)相關(guān)研究中對我國公司董事責(zé)任救濟制度的建構(gòu)完全照搬外國的做法。筆者結(jié)合我國的實際情況,對國外的成熟制度進行了有選擇性的引入,并結(jié)合我國實際提出了具體的完善路徑。比如說對于商業(yè)判斷規(guī)則,國內(nèi)研究普遍認為應(yīng)當(dāng)引入,而筆者認為從目前我國的實際情況來看,還沒有立即引入的必要性。③對日本公司董事責(zé)任免除制度的分析是以最新的《日本公司法典》為基礎(chǔ)展開的,分析的文獻依據(jù)具有一定的新穎性。目前國內(nèi)對日本董事責(zé)任救濟的相關(guān)研究依據(jù)大多還是2002年修訂后的日本新商法中的規(guī)定,而本文分析的依據(jù)是2005年發(fā)布的《日本公司法典》。 本文的主要不足是：由于沒有收集到我國對董事違反注意義務(wù)所產(chǎn)生的民事責(zé)任進行救濟的實際案例,所以筆者最初想采取實證的方法研究本問題的目標一直沒有轉(zhuǎn)化為現(xiàn)實,不免是一大遺憾。
[Abstract]:The duty of care is one of the important duty of the board of directors of the company bear. In the modern company "by the shareholders (large) will change the center" to "the world trend of the center of board of directors under the board of directors in a very important position in the company. For a long time, to the board of directors abuse concerns based on my research and practice Ancient Chinese Literature Search in the research on corporate governance in general tend to strengthen the director's obligations. This paper argues that strengthening the duty and liability of directors and the board of directors to reduce the risk and pressure should be two aspects of perfecting the responsibility system of the director, the current trend, only pay attention to one aspect of perfecting the responsibility system of the director, and did not reduce the risk and pressure from the board of directors violating the duty of attention pay attention to legal relief system.
This article focuses on the healthy development of company operation and the risk and pressure of directors, and discusses the perfection of the legal remedy system of directors' duty of care violation in China.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the full text is divided into three parts.
The first part: the basic problems of law violating the duty of relief: theoretical study. Firstly, the fair value of the law, the private nature of the company law, the board of directors from three aspects of the legal status of the trustee, expounds directors violating the duty of legal relief law basis; secondly from the balance of China's company law in the interests of the company and shareholders over protection, obviously insufficient to make up for our company law relief to the board of directors, directors encouraged actively as the three aspects in the commercial activities of our company's directors described attention necessity of violating the duty of legal relief, lay a theoretical and practical basis to further improve our company's directors note violating the duty of legal relief system.
The second part: the legal obligation violation remedy: extraterritorial comparison. Common law and civil law from the selection of a representative countries, namely the United States and Japan, pay attention to legal remedies for violating the duty of extraterritorial systematic investigation and comparative analysis of the two directors. The directors pay attention to perfect relief the legal system of violating the duty must be from our country's reality, with its legal tradition and economic, cultural and social background as the basis to construct.
The third part: our company's directors violating the duty of legal remedy: path choice. Starting from the actual situation of our country, the board of directors of the United States and Japan, pay attention to legal remedies for violating the duty are analyzed, and suggestions put forward to perfect the legal relief system of violating the duty of directors of our company: in the construction of attention our company's directors pay attention to legal relief system in violation of obligation, the court invoked the business judgment rule exemption from liability of directors and the board of directors on the compensation system of the cost of the transplant in our country is still not has the necessity, also denied the United States and Japan, the resolution of the board of directors for exemption from liability of directors in our country; our company. It should be made clear in violation of law > can pay attention to the civil liabilities arising from the relief to the board of directors, and shall specify the requirements for the implementation of the relief act, which is subjective Must be in good faith and without gross negligence, the objective must be directors behavior; the law of our country should perfect the liability exemption system of objection directors, perfecting the directors liability insurance system, the introduction of foreign company autonomous directors liability exemption system based on, and put forward specific improvement suggestions and the introduction of the measures; the law of our country should learn from Japan's practice of special type of director liability relief to make special provisions for independent directors and responsibility for relief workers in the board of directors respectively make special provisions.
The main innovations of this paper are as follows: to pay attention to the path of our company's directors violating the duty of legal relief for the system in order to break the current relevant research, only introduce a system approach to construct China's board of directors duty of care of the legal relief system of "three levels" framework, that is clear to Director General of legal relief conditions, specific path general director liability relief, the special type of director liability relief. The special requirements to break the current domestic research in the construction of the responsibility of our company's directors relief system of copying the practices of foreign countries. According to the actual situation of our country, the mature system of foreign countries the introduction of selective, combined with the reality of our country puts forward specific improvement path. For example, the business judgment rule, domestic research is generally believed that should be introduced, I believe that from the current actual situation of our country, no need for immediate introduction. On the analysis of the system of the exemption of liability of directors of Japanese companies in the new company law > < Japan as the basis of the analysis of the literature basis has a certain novelty. On the basis of relevant researches on Japanese directors liability the relief are specified in the 2002 revised new Japanese commercial law, and this paper is based on the 2005 release of the "Japanese company code.
The main shortcoming of this paper is that, because no actual cases of civil liability for directors' breach of duty of care have been collected in China, so the author initially tried to take an empirical approach to study the goal of this issue, which has never been translated into reality, which is a great pity.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南財經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 任自力;;美國公司董事誠信義務(wù)研究[J];比較法研究;2007年02期

2 張昊;李震東;;論董事責(zé)任的豁免機制[J];重慶工商大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2006年04期

3 劉敬偉;;董事勤勉義務(wù)判斷標準比較研究[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2007年05期

4 朱征夫;論美國公司法董事的權(quán)利與義務(wù)[J];法學(xué)雜志;2000年02期

5 任自力;曹文澤;;論公司董事責(zé)任的限制[J];法學(xué)家;2007年05期

6 王申;朱傳林訴趙建平董事?lián)p害公司利益糾紛案法律適用理論研討會綜述[J];法學(xué);2001年08期

7 李燕;;美國公司法上的商業(yè)判斷規(guī)則和董事義務(wù)剖析[J];法學(xué);2006年05期

8 蔡元慶;;論美國的董事責(zé)任限制及免除制度[J];廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué)學(xué)報;2006年03期

9 吳鳳君;澳大利亞公司法中的董事義務(wù)及對我國的立法啟示[J];遼寧大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2005年06期

10 王靜;肖尤丹;;論公司董事勤勉義務(wù)的判斷標準[J];遼寧大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2007年05期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 李震東;公司董事責(zé)任免除與豁免制度研究[D];暨南大學(xué);2005年

2 陳國瑜;董事民事責(zé)任免除法律問題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2006年

3 王孜孜;董事違反注意義務(wù)的民事責(zé)任研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年

4 劉瀾晶;董事責(zé)任的救濟制度研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2008年

5 胡從寶;董事責(zé)任限制制度在中國公司法上的建構(gòu)[D];中國政法大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號：1633845