本文選題：異議股東股權(quán)收買請求權(quán) + 理論��； 參考：《華東政法大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：公司制企業(yè)在當(dāng)代雖然被視為高效率的資本組織形式,但由于大多數(shù)公司決策采用資本多數(shù)決,導(dǎo)致了部分對公司重大決策持異議的股東由于持股比例無法與其他大股東抗衡而無法達(dá)成自己訴求或無法實(shí)現(xiàn)投資初衷,因此,異議股東股權(quán)收買請求權(quán)應(yīng)運(yùn)而生,異議股東可以請求公司收買其股權(quán)以取得相應(yīng)補(bǔ)償,彌補(bǔ)該表決制度對他們權(quán)益可能造成的侵害。該制度最早起源于美國,世界大多數(shù)公司立法成熟的國家均對此作了詳細(xì)規(guī)定。1993年我國公司法未認(rèn)可該制度。2005年修訂后的公司法第75條賦予有限責(zé)任公司的異議股東股權(quán)收買請求權(quán),使異議股東在公司發(fā)生基礎(chǔ)性變更時(shí)得以向公司主張股權(quán)收買,保障其合法權(quán)益。但在制度的具體設(shè)計(jì)上,新公司法一是以列舉方式明確了適用條件,二是設(shè)定了股東和公司無法達(dá)成收買協(xié)議時(shí)提起訴訟的除斥期間。規(guī)則設(shè)計(jì)較為簡略。與世界上其他成熟的公司立法相比,存在適用范圍狹窄、行使程序粗略、股權(quán)價(jià)格評估欠缺標(biāo)準(zhǔn)或規(guī)則、相關(guān)費(fèi)用分擔(dān)不清、舉證責(zé)任分配規(guī)則不明等問題。股權(quán)公平價(jià)值評估程序的規(guī)定作為核心內(nèi)容,尤其需要明確。這些問題的存在使法院在面臨糾紛時(shí)難以果斷裁判,更使公司和股東面對現(xiàn)實(shí)的矛盾無法尋找到一條清晰的解決路徑,限制了該制度功能的發(fā)揮。 本文以有限責(zé)任公司異議股東股權(quán)收買請求權(quán)所涉及的股權(quán)評估和公平價(jià)格的達(dá)成為著眼點(diǎn),重點(diǎn)論述我國評估權(quán)行使過程中可能遇到的一些困惑和障礙,結(jié)合外國公司法的立法規(guī)定和實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)進(jìn)行分析。同時(shí)在論述中對有限公司異議股東股權(quán)收買請求權(quán)的主體、程序和規(guī)則也作了相應(yīng)闡述。 現(xiàn)實(shí)的困境是制度改革的絕佳動(dòng)力,雖然股權(quán)收買制度在我國公司立法上已經(jīng)確立,但實(shí)施中仍有許多阻礙和困難需要克服。同時(shí),該制度也需要不斷的完善與創(chuàng)新,以提高制度的實(shí)施效果,最大限度地平衡股東各方的權(quán)利義務(wù)。唯此,才能更有效地保護(hù)股東的權(quán)益。
[Abstract]:Although corporate enterprises are regarded as efficient forms of capital organization in modern times, because most companies adopt capital majority decision,As a result, some shareholders who disagree with the major decisions of the company are unable to achieve their own demands or realize their original intention of investment because the proportion of shares held by them cannot compete with other major shareholders. Therefore, the right of shareholders to ask for the purchase of shares of dissenting shareholders arises at the historic moment.Dissenting shareholders may ask the company to buy their shares in order to obtain corresponding compensation to make up for the possible infringement of their rights and interests caused by the voting system.The system originated in the United States,Most of the countries with mature company legislation in the world have made detailed provisions on this issue. This system has not been approved by China's Company Law in 1993. Article 75 of the revised Company Law in 2005 gives limited liability companies the right to ask for compensation for dissenting shareholders' shares.The dissenting shareholders can claim to buy shares and protect their legitimate rights and interests in the event of fundamental changes in the company.However, in the specific design of the system, the new company law defines the applicable conditions by way of enumeration, and sets the period of action when shareholders and companies cannot reach a buyout agreement.The design of rules is relatively simple.Compared with other mature company legislation in the world, there are some problems, such as narrow scope of application, rough exercise procedure, lack of standard or rules for stock price evaluation, unclear sharing of related expenses, unclear rules of burden of proof distribution, etc.Equity equity evaluation procedures as the core of the provisions, especially need to be clear.The existence of these problems makes it difficult for the court to adjudicate decisively in the face of disputes, and it also makes the contradiction between the company and the shareholders facing the reality to find a clear way to solve, which limits the function of the system.This paper focuses on the equity evaluation and the achievement of fair price involved in the claim of dissenting shareholders' share right of limited liability company, and mainly discusses some puzzles and obstacles that may be encountered in the process of exercising the right of evaluation in our country.Combined with the legislative provisions of foreign company law and practical experience to analyze.At the same time, the main body, procedure and rules of the claim right of dissenting shareholder's share right of limited company are expounded.The dilemma of reality is the best motive force for the reform of the system. Although the system of share buyout has been established in the legislation of our country, there are still many obstacles and difficulties to be overcome in the implementation.At the same time, the system also needs continuous improvement and innovation, in order to improve the implementation of the system and maximize the balance between the rights and obligations of the shareholders.Only in this way, can the rights and interests of shareholders be protected more effectively.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 潘萍;簡論債權(quán)人異議權(quán)制度[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)論壇;2003年17期

2 鄧自力;對督促程序異議權(quán)的實(shí)踐認(rèn)識[J];中央政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1994年02期

3 朱杰,肖國耀;民事訴訟異議制度初探[J];內(nèi)蒙古社會科學(xué)(漢文版);2001年06期

4 鄭孟狀;郭站紅;;異議股東股權(quán)收買請求權(quán)與債權(quán)人保護(hù)[J];學(xué)習(xí)與探索;2009年02期

5 孔璇,董鈺;公司合并中債權(quán)人保護(hù)制度之法問題[J];山東行政學(xué)院.山東省經(jīng)濟(jì)管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年03期

6 陳嵐,王媛媛;刑事被告人的審判管轄異議權(quán)初探[J];河北法學(xué);2003年02期

7 王晗;公司運(yùn)行中銀行貸款債權(quán)保障措施研究[J];河南金融管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年06期

8 許建添;;刑事訴訟中管轄權(quán)異議若干問題芻議[J];河南廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2007年02期

9 榮榮;石來;;論我國督促程序的完善[J];湖北廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2010年12期

10 王青,姜春蘭;支付令異議權(quán)淺析[J];政法論叢;1997年03期

相關(guān)會議論文 前10條

1 鐘澄;;論在我國《仲裁法》中設(shè)置“異議權(quán)放棄條款”[A];2008全國博士生學(xué)術(shù)論壇（國際法）論文集——國際公法、國際私法分冊[C];2008年

2 潘志恒;;論WTO規(guī)范體系的特殊性及其對我國行政法律制度的沖擊[A];第三屆中國律師論壇論文集（實(shí)務(wù)卷）[C];2003年

3 紀(jì)信義;劉政淮;曹壽民;;公司治理結(jié)構(gòu)對財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告品質(zhì)可靠性之影響——以盈余門坎分析探討[A];首屆內(nèi)部控制專題學(xué)術(shù)研討會論文集[C];2009年

4 劉政淮;紀(jì)信義;曹壽民;;控制股東股權(quán)結(jié)構(gòu)、自愿性盈余預(yù)測與分析師預(yù)測之研究[A];中國會計(jì)學(xué)會審計(jì)專業(yè)委員會2010年學(xué)術(shù)年會論文集[C];2010年

5 王洪榮;;刑事訴訟中被害人權(quán)利保護(hù)問題研究[A];中國犯罪學(xué)學(xué)會第十七屆學(xué)術(shù)研討會論文集[C];2008年

6 黃亞英;;我國商事仲裁疑難問題及其最新法院典型案例分析[A];中國仲裁與司法論壇暨2010年年會論文集[C];2010年

7 朱潔;趙文喜;田野;吳r，

本文編號：1748374