本文選題：股東 + 代表訴訟　； 參考：《中央民族大學》2010年碩士論文

【摘要】：法律制度的設立重要的是能與社會生活的發(fā)展實際需要相符合,在現(xiàn)實的經(jīng)濟生活當中,公司的經(jīng)營管理由于傳統(tǒng)資本多數(shù)決原則的約束,大股東在公司治理過程之中占有著絕對優(yōu)勢,由此也導致大股東利用其資本優(yōu)勢侵害其它中小股東和公司利益的案例早有發(fā)生。股東代表訴訟制度肇始于英國,后在美國得到全面發(fā)展,法國、加拿大、日本、中國臺灣等許多國家和地區(qū)的商法或公司法中都規(guī)定了該制度。盡管股東代表訴訟制度在英、美、日等國家早有相關立法,但在我國很長時間里股東代表訴訟制度一直停留在理論階段,僅有的只是對直接侵害股東利益的直接訴權保護。目前,股東代表訴訟制度已成為現(xiàn)代公司法的一項重要內(nèi)容,成為彌補公司治理結構缺陷的必要手段,在保護中小股東權益等方面發(fā)揮著重要作用,在許多國家和地區(qū)的公司法中都確立了這一制度。股東代表訴訟制度在我國經(jīng)過逐步的探索研究,在2005年新《公司法》中得以正式確立,其中規(guī)定了原告股東資格、被告、適用的糾紛形態(tài)、訴訟前置程序等方面的內(nèi)容,但我國新《公司法》關于股東代表訴訟制度的規(guī)定比較原則化,其可操作性不強,在程序法和實體法方面,諸如公司的法律地位、訴訟費用補償制度、原告股東的處分權等方面并沒有作出進一步的規(guī)定,有一些規(guī)定也不夠完善,缺乏具體的操作性。有必要運用一定的研究方法對相關問題進行進一步研究以更好地健全我國股東代表訴訟制度。 文章全文分為三個部分,在第一部分中對股東代表訴訟制度進行了概括性地介紹,全文重點在第二部分和第三部分,分別從程序法角度和實體法角度對股東代表訴訟制度的現(xiàn)有規(guī)定結合其它國家的立法經(jīng)驗進行了對比分析總結,對前置程序、當事人身份確定、訴訟的提起、收費、調(diào)解、補償、撤訴、執(zhí)行等現(xiàn)實操作層面一一做了分析,并提出了自己的立法建議,以期該制度能更好地為中小股東的合法利益服務。在目前的相關期刊論文中,對股東代表訴訟收費制度,大部分意見傾向于學習日本股東代表訴訟制度的相關規(guī)定按非財產(chǎn)案件定額收費,以利于本來就處于弱勢地位的中小股東方便提起訴訟。對于公司的訴訟地位,按照我國傳統(tǒng)的法律思維,大部分研究者的意見認為公司應在訴訟中以無獨立請求權第三人的位置列明,當然這一意見也存在著很大的爭議,但相關方面的不斷探討也為相關司法解釋的出臺提供了強有力的理論基礎。本文希望以現(xiàn)實操作為出發(fā)點,通過對股東代表訴訟制度的理論探討,在延伸理論的基礎上,對實際的立法、司法解釋及法律運用提供一些有益的引導。
[Abstract]:The establishment of the legal system is important to be able to meet the actual needs of the development of social life. In the real economic life, the management of the company is restricted by the traditional principle of majority determination of capital. Large shareholders have absolute advantages in the process of corporate governance, which also leads to cases where large shareholders use their capital advantages to infringe on the interests of other small and medium shareholders and companies. The shareholder representative litigation system began in Britain and developed in the United States. It is stipulated in the commercial law or company law of many countries and regions such as France Canada Japan Taiwan and so on. Although the shareholder representative litigation system in Britain, the United States, Japan and other countries have long had relevant legislation, but in our country for a long time, the shareholder representative litigation system has been staying in the theoretical stage, the only thing is to directly infringe on the shareholders' interests of direct litigation protection. At present, shareholder representative litigation system has become an important part of modern company law, a necessary means to remedy the defects of corporate governance structure, and plays an important role in protecting the rights and interests of minority shareholders. This system has been established in the company law of many countries and regions. The shareholder representative litigation system has been established in the new Company Law in 2005 after gradual exploration and research in our country. It stipulates the qualification of the plaintiff shareholder, the defendant, the applicable dispute form, the pre-litigation procedure, and so on. However, the provisions of the new Company Law concerning the shareholder representative litigation system are more principled and less operable. In terms of procedural law and substantive law, such as the legal status of the company, the system of compensation for litigation expenses, The plaintiff shareholder's disposition right and so on has not made the further stipulation, some stipulation also is not perfect, lacks the concrete operation. It is necessary to use certain research methods to further study the related problems in order to perfect the shareholder representative litigation system in China. The article is divided into three parts, in the first part of the shareholder representative litigation system is introduced in a general way, the full text focuses on the second part and the third part, From the point of view of procedural law and substantive law respectively, this paper makes a comparative analysis and summary of the existing provisions of the shareholder's representative litigation system combined with the legislative experience of other countries, and makes a comparative analysis and summary of the pre-procedure, the determination of the parties' identity, the initiation of litigation, the collection of fees, the mediation, In order to serve the legitimate interests of minority shareholders, the author makes an analysis of compensation, withdrawal, execution and other practical operational aspects, and puts forward his own legislative suggestions in the hope that the system can better serve the legitimate interests of minority shareholders. In the current related journal papers, the majority of opinions on the shareholder representative litigation system tend to learn from the relevant provisions of the Japanese shareholder representative litigation system and charge fees according to the scale of non-property cases. In order to facilitate the disadvantaged position of small and medium shareholders to file a lawsuit. As for the litigation status of the company, according to the traditional legal thinking of our country, most researchers think that the company should list the position of the third party without independent claim in the litigation. Of course, this opinion is also very controversial. However, the continuous discussion of related aspects also provides a strong theoretical basis for the introduction of relevant judicial interpretation. This article hopes to take the realistic operation as the starting point, through to the shareholder representative litigation system theory discussion, in the extension theory foundation, provides some beneficial guidance to the actual legislation, the judicial interpretation and the legal application.
【學位授予單位】：中央民族大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 古國平;派生訴訟之當事人研究[J];巢湖學院學報;2003年02期

2 周劍龍;論股份有限公司經(jīng)營的內(nèi)部監(jiān)督機制──中國公司法發(fā)展之前瞻[J];法學評論;1995年01期

3 胡濱,曹順明;股東派生訴訟的合理性基礎與制度設計[J];法學研究;2004年04期

4 周劍龍;;日本公司法制現(xiàn)代化中的股東代表訴訟制度[J];南京大學學報(哲學.人文科學.社會科學版);2006年03期

5 曾培芳,盛建明;英國公司法中的派生訴訟初探──少數(shù)股股東權利的救濟之一[J];南京理工大學學報(社會科學版);1999年03期

6 林馨;日本股東代表訴訟制度評析[J];日本研究;1999年02期

7 張民安;派生訴訟研究[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;1998年06期

8 陳靜波;;論新《公司法》確立的股東代表訴訟制度[J];行政與法;2006年09期

9 李衛(wèi)國;向長勝;;試論我國股東代表訴訟制度的完善[J];云南行政學院學報;2007年01期

10 王利明;;論股份制企業(yè)所有權的二重結構——與郭鋒同志商榷[J];中國法學;1989年01期

，

本文編號：2112852