本文選題：股權(quán)質(zhì)押 + 合同效力　； 參考：《北方工業(yè)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文分為六個(gè)部分。第一部分介紹了股權(quán)質(zhì)押融資活動(dòng)現(xiàn)狀和存在的潛在風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。我國(guó)的股權(quán)質(zhì)押制度十分混亂,在實(shí)踐中不按規(guī)定,隨意操作的也比較嚴(yán)重。這種混亂不僅表現(xiàn)在行政管理上,還表現(xiàn)在法律規(guī)定上,而且由于法律規(guī)定的不明晰,往往導(dǎo)致同案不同判的狀況,這又在一定程度上阻礙了股權(quán)質(zhì)押的擔(dān)保功能、融資功能難以實(shí)現(xiàn),不利于助推實(shí)體經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展。第二部分明確了股權(quán)質(zhì)押的理論基礎(chǔ)。首先明確股權(quán)質(zhì)押應(yīng)當(dāng)是物權(quán)。其次,股權(quán)質(zhì)押物權(quán)變動(dòng)規(guī)則上應(yīng)當(dāng)采用分原則。第三部分簡(jiǎn)單的分析了股權(quán)質(zhì)押合同與股權(quán)質(zhì)權(quán)的關(guān)系,通過(guò)案例分析表明我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐中已經(jīng)將債權(quán)行為與物權(quán)行為進(jìn)行了區(qū)分,事實(shí)上承認(rèn)了"物權(quán)形式主義"。接下來(lái)的第四、五部分按照合同的效力狀態(tài),分別討論了股權(quán)質(zhì)押合同無(wú)效、應(yīng)當(dāng)有效情形。在合同無(wú)效部分主要就股權(quán)質(zhì)押和股權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓的關(guān)系進(jìn)行了梳理,認(rèn)為股權(quán)質(zhì)押與股權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓應(yīng)當(dāng)脫離,在法律上沒(méi)有相互關(guān)聯(lián)的必要性。通過(guò)案例分析、梳理各項(xiàng)規(guī)定之后得出,股權(quán)質(zhì)押合同不應(yīng)受《公司法》16條、71條的限制,未經(jīng)審批的外資企業(yè)股權(quán)質(zhì)押合同也應(yīng)當(dāng)有效的結(jié)論。隱名股東與名義股東、未實(shí)繳出資股東與瑕疵出資股東雖然從表面上看對(duì)股權(quán)都有無(wú)權(quán)處分的可能,但都應(yīng)認(rèn)定為有效合同,而非效力待定的合同。最終,筆者通過(guò)研究股權(quán)質(zhì)押的相關(guān)案例,明確了司法實(shí)踐中已經(jīng)逐漸采用了分離原則與處分行為效力待定說(shuō),廣泛承認(rèn)合同的有效性。因此,應(yīng)當(dāng)充分考慮我國(guó)這種長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)積累下的司法經(jīng)驗(yàn),及時(shí)修改相應(yīng)的法律規(guī)則,為股權(quán)質(zhì)押實(shí)現(xiàn)其制度價(jià)值提供保障。
[Abstract]:This paper is divided into six parts. The first part introduces the current situation and potential risks of equity pledge financing. Our country's stock right pledge system is very chaotic, in practice does not follow the stipulation, the random operation is also quite serious. This confusion is manifested not only in the administration, but also in the legal provisions. Due to the lack of clarity of the legal provisions, it often leads to different judgments in the same case, which to a certain extent hinders the guarantee function of the equity pledge. Financing function is difficult to achieve, not conducive to the development of the real economy. The second part clarifies the theoretical basis of equity pledge. First of all, it is clear that equity pledge should be real right. Secondly, the principle of division should be adopted in the rules of real right change of equity pledge. The third part simply analyzes the relationship between the equity pledge contract and the equity pledge right, and shows that the act of creditor's rights and the real right act have been distinguished in the judicial practice of our country through the case analysis, in fact, the "real right formalism" has been recognized. Then the fourth and fifth parts discuss the invalidity of equity pledge contract according to the validity of the contract. In the invalid part of the contract, the relationship between equity pledge and equity transfer is combed, and it is considered that equity pledge and equity transfer should be separated from each other, and there is no legal necessity for them to be related to each other. Through case analysis, it is concluded that the contract of equity pledge should not be restricted by Article 71 of Company Law, and that the contract of equity pledge of foreign capital enterprise without examination and approval should be effective. Although hidden shareholders and nominal shareholders, unpaid-up shareholders and defective shareholders may not have the right to dispose of the shares, they should be regarded as valid contracts, not as valid ones. Finally, by studying the relevant cases of equity pledge, the author makes clear that the separation principle and the validity of disposition have been gradually adopted in judicial practice, and the validity of the contract is widely recognized. Therefore, we should fully consider the judicial experience accumulated in our country for a long time, amend the corresponding legal rules in time, and provide the guarantee for the realization of the institutional value of equity pledge.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：北方工業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 李錫鶴;;應(yīng)區(qū)分合同與非合同協(xié)議、偽協(xié)議[J];東方法學(xué);2012年02期

2 徐海燕;;有限責(zé)任公司股權(quán)質(zhì)押效力規(guī)則的反思與重構(gòu)[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2011年03期

3 閻天懷;論股權(quán)質(zhì)押[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);1999年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1872896