【摘要】：收購已經(jīng)成為上市公司發(fā)展和壯大的外部成長(zhǎng)方式,通過公開要約收購方式以取得目標(biāo)公司的經(jīng)營(yíng)控制權(quán),已逐漸成為各國企業(yè)并購中的主要手段。而在收購的過程中,目標(biāo)公司董事由于與公司利益各方都休戚相關(guān),故其對(duì)于收購的態(tài)度或行為都將對(duì)目標(biāo)公司及其股東利益產(chǎn)生實(shí)質(zhì)性影響,并容易陷入一種嚴(yán)重的利益沖突鑒于目標(biāo)公司董事在收購中的特殊地位,為有效規(guī)制其從事嚴(yán)重的利益沖突行為,維護(hù)目標(biāo)公司及其股東的利益,英美國家率先將傳統(tǒng)公司法的董事義務(wù)理論引入證券活動(dòng)的理論和實(shí)踐中,并逐漸發(fā)展成為當(dāng)今世界最具代表性的兩種目標(biāo)公司董事信賴義務(wù)模式,形成了今天針對(duì)目標(biāo)公司董事行為的相對(duì)完備的法律規(guī)制。 本文立足我國現(xiàn)實(shí),擬通過研究國外規(guī)制目標(biāo)公司董事行為的相關(guān)立法和司法實(shí)踐,在借鑒其有關(guān)立法的基礎(chǔ)上提出構(gòu)建我國上市公司收購中目標(biāo)董事義務(wù)模式及完善的建議。全文分為引言、正文和結(jié)束語。 正文部分分為三章:第一章為上市公司收購中的目標(biāo)公司董事信賴義務(wù)。本章進(jìn)行了收購和反收購的一般理論介紹,結(jié)合董事信賴義務(wù)的根源和發(fā)展,指出強(qiáng)化董事信賴義務(wù)已成為反收購立法中一個(gè)重要的命題。第二章為上市公司董事信賴義務(wù)規(guī)制的不同模式比較。本章介紹了國外對(duì)目標(biāo)公司董事信賴義務(wù)不同的法律規(guī)制,即美國的董事中立模式和英國的股東大會(huì)決定模式。通過兩種模式的比較,評(píng)析了美國和英國在各自立法背景下對(duì)反收購中董事信賴義務(wù)的規(guī)范。第三章為我國目標(biāo)公司董事信賴義務(wù)立法及實(shí)施機(jī)制之檢視。本章的將討論的重點(diǎn)放在我國的現(xiàn)狀上,通過我國董事職能的轉(zhuǎn)變和相關(guān)立法的分析,探究我國現(xiàn)行法律體系中的不足,并對(duì)我國反收購中董事信賴義務(wù)得以合理履行的前提做出分析,提出我國反收購中強(qiáng)化董事信賴義務(wù)的若干具體制度。建議在完善相關(guān)立法的同時(shí),以激勵(lì)和約束并行的理念為指導(dǎo),通過公司內(nèi)控和外控雙重機(jī)制的共同作用,保障董事信賴義務(wù)的最大化履行。 結(jié)語部分對(duì)本文進(jìn)行了總結(jié),提出要使我國有關(guān)公司董事信賴義務(wù)的立法約束發(fā)揮出應(yīng)有的效力,一方面要不斷完善我國的法律體系,另一方面就是要培育法律制度賴以有效實(shí)施的文化基礎(chǔ),力圖早日在我國建立起完善的信托文化。
[Abstract]:Acquisition has become the external growth mode for the development and growth of listed companies. To obtain the management control rights of the target companies through public offer acquisition has gradually become the main means of mergers and acquisitions of enterprises in various countries. In the process of acquisition, the directors of the target company have a substantial impact on the interests of the target company and its shareholders because they are closely related to the interests of the company, so their attitude or behavior towards the acquisition will have a substantial impact on the interests of the target company and its shareholders. And it is easy to fall into a serious conflict of interest, in view of the special position of the director of the target company in the acquisition, in order to effectively regulate its serious conflict of interest behavior, protect the interests of the target company and its shareholders. Anglo-American countries take the lead in introducing the theory of directors' obligations of traditional company law into the theory and practice of securities activities, and gradually develop into the two most representative models of directors' trust obligations of target companies in the world. It forms a relatively complete legal regulation on the director behavior of the target company today. Based on the reality of our country, this paper, by studying the relevant legislation and judicial practice of regulating the directors' behavior of target companies in foreign countries, puts forward some suggestions on how to construct the target directors' obligation mode in the acquisition of listed companies in our country on the basis of the relevant legislation. The full text is divided into preface, text and conclusion. The main body is divided into three chapters: the first chapter is the trust obligation of the target company. This chapter introduces the general theory of takeover and anti-takeover and points out that strengthening the trust duty of directors has become an important proposition in the legislation of anti-takeover combined with the origin and development of directors' fiduciary duty. The second chapter is the comparison of different models of directors' trust obligation regulation in listed companies. This chapter introduces the different legal regulations on the directors' trust obligation in foreign countries, that is, the neutral mode of directors in the United States and the decision mode of the shareholders' general meeting in the United Kingdom. Through the comparison of the two models, this paper analyzes the norms of the trust obligations of the directors in the anti-takeover in the background of the respective legislation in the United States and the United Kingdom. The third chapter examines the legislation and implementation mechanism of the directors' trust obligation in China's target companies. This chapter will focus on the current situation of our country, through the transformation of the functions of our directors and the analysis of relevant legislation, to explore the shortcomings of our current legal system, This paper also analyzes the premise that the director's trust duty can be reasonably fulfilled in China's anti-takeover, and puts forward some concrete systems to strengthen the director's trust obligation in the anti-takeover. It is suggested that, while perfecting the relevant legislation, under the guidance of the idea of encouragement and restraint, and through the joint action of internal control and external control, the maximization of directors' trust obligations can be guaranteed. The conclusion part summarizes this article, and puts forward that we should make the legislative restraint of the trust duty of directors in our country play its due effect, on the one hand, we should constantly perfect our legal system. On the other hand, it is necessary to cultivate the cultural foundation on which the legal system is effectively implemented and try to establish a perfect trust culture in our country as soon as possible.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華僑大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 韋偉;積極培育中國股市的機(jī)構(gòu)投資者[J];財(cái)經(jīng)理論與實(shí)踐;2000年05期

2 葉衛(wèi)平;英美董事義務(wù)與目標(biāo)公司反收購[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2002年01期

3 匡慧;;論董事監(jiān)督職責(zé)的完善——對(duì)新《公司法》中董事義務(wù)的思考[J];大慶師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年01期

4 金錫華;;新時(shí)期監(jiān)事會(huì)的業(yè)務(wù)監(jiān)督——以中日兩國董事義務(wù)為視角[J];貴州民族學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年06期

5 劉桂清;論目標(biāo)公司董事的忠實(shí)義務(wù)[J];河北法學(xué);2002年06期

6 陳永;;論我國目標(biāo)公司反收購中的董事義務(wù)規(guī)制[J];河南司法警官職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年01期

7 劉玉杰;目標(biāo)公司反收購決策權(quán)歸屬問題探討[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)與管理;2004年03期

8 李建偉;;論公司社會(huì)責(zé)任的內(nèi)涵界定與實(shí)現(xiàn)機(jī)制建構(gòu)——以董事的信義義務(wù)為視角[J];清華法學(xué);2010年02期

9 張捷;;英美公司董事信義義務(wù)的起源與啟示[J];世界經(jīng)濟(jì)情況;2007年12期

10 王懷勇;;董事義務(wù)的比較法研究[J];特區(qū)經(jīng)濟(jì);2009年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 黃文;目標(biāo)公司反收購中董事信義義務(wù)研究[D];西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2007年

2 王瑞杰;論董事的經(jīng)營(yíng)判斷原則[D];鄭州大學(xué);2007年

3 胡文敏;反收購視野下目標(biāo)公司董事信義義務(wù)之研究[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2008年

4 周映;公開要約收購中目標(biāo)公司董事義務(wù)研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號(hào)：2232895