發(fā)布時間：2019-05-17 09:35

【摘要】：所謂關(guān)聯(lián)擔保，是指發(fā)生在兩個以上具有關(guān)聯(lián)關(guān)系的公司之間的擔保，其主體之間可能是形式上存在這種關(guān)聯(lián)關(guān)系，如母公司與子公司之間，也可能是形式上不存在但實質(zhì)上存在關(guān)聯(lián)關(guān)系，如控制公司與被控制公司。與一般擔保相比，二者之間最主要的不同之處就在于擔保關(guān)系中主體的特殊性。在關(guān)聯(lián)擔保中，主體是關(guān)聯(lián)公司【1】，這些關(guān)聯(lián)公司在形式上具有獨立的法人格。但現(xiàn)實生活中，由于這些主體之間存在資金、經(jīng)營、股權(quán)等方面特殊的利益關(guān)系，使其一方面較不具有這種特殊關(guān)系的主體更容易獲得擔保，另一方面也存在這些主體中的控股股東利用這種特殊關(guān)系，使它們之間形成事實上的支配與從屬關(guān)系的可能性，導致關(guān)聯(lián)擔保變成利益輸送的一條重要渠道，而傳統(tǒng)的合同法、擔保法等法律對此種情形也是束手無策，加上關(guān)聯(lián)擔保的擔保金額較一般擔保金額大的多且普遍的多，因此關(guān)聯(lián)擔保比一般擔保也具有更大的危害性。公司關(guān)聯(lián)擔保的產(chǎn)生與關(guān)聯(lián)公司的產(chǎn)生日益普遍密切相關(guān)，是一種正常的經(jīng)濟現(xiàn)象。其對于擴大公司經(jīng)營規(guī)模、提高公司整體競爭力和維續(xù)公司的長遠發(fā)展都起到重要的作用，但在肯定關(guān)聯(lián)擔保益處時，還應(yīng)該考慮到，一旦關(guān)聯(lián)擔保未得到合理的規(guī)制，發(fā)生的不公允關(guān)聯(lián)擔保將對市場經(jīng)濟監(jiān)控、穩(wěn)定的經(jīng)營秩序產(chǎn)生極大地威脅。正是如此，我國法律也對其進行了特別的規(guī)定.但是由于現(xiàn)行相關(guān)法律體系不完善，還存在很多問題，導致不公允關(guān)聯(lián)擔保的現(xiàn)象普遍存在并有擴大之勢，嚴重破壞了我國公司獨立人格制度，，也侵害了公司、公司中小股東和公司債權(quán)人利益。因此，對于關(guān)聯(lián)擔保這原本中性的制度，在認可其有利一面的同時時，如何從法律角度有效的防范不公允關(guān)聯(lián)擔保的發(fā)生，對其進行合理的規(guī)制，既是當前法學理論界又是本文急需探討并有待解決的問題。 本文將規(guī)制關(guān)聯(lián)擔保特別是不公允關(guān)聯(lián)擔保作為貫穿全文的線索，對我國現(xiàn)行相關(guān)法律體系進行系統(tǒng)分析。并以保護公司、中小股東、債權(quán)人等利益相關(guān)者的利益為出發(fā)點，考察其它國家和地區(qū)相關(guān)的立法和制度。加以學理比較分析，并在此基礎(chǔ)上立足我國國情，提出對我國關(guān)聯(lián)擔保進行規(guī)制的相關(guān)法律建議。 按照上述思路，本文大致可以分為五個部分： 第一部分主要針對我國現(xiàn)行關(guān)聯(lián)擔保的相關(guān)法律制度進行分析，并提出其中存在的問題。 第二部分主要是介紹其它國家和地區(qū)規(guī)制關(guān)聯(lián)擔保的相關(guān)法律制度。 第三部分主要是比較我國規(guī)制關(guān)聯(lián)擔保的相關(guān)法律制度與其它國家和地區(qū)的之間存在的異同，出現(xiàn)該異同的原因，最后給出了規(guī)制我國公司關(guān)聯(lián)擔保的總體思路。 第四部分是結(jié)合第三部分給出的總體思路，提出了完善我國現(xiàn)行相關(guān)法律制度的建議。 最后部分是對本文的一個總結(jié)。
[Abstract]:The so-called affiliated guarantee refers to the guarantee that occurs between more than two companies with a related relationship, and its subject may have such a formal relationship, such as between the parent company and the subsidiary company. It may also be that there is no formal but substantially related relationship, such as the controlled company and the controlled company. Compared with the general guarantee, the most important difference between the two lies in the particularity of the subject in the guarantee relationship. In the affiliated guarantee, the subject is the affiliated company [1], these affiliated companies have independent legal personality in form. However, in real life, because of the special interest relationship among these subjects, such as capital, management, equity and so on, on the one hand, it is easier for the subject to obtain the guarantee than the subject who does not have this special relationship. On the other hand, there is also the possibility that the controlling shareholders in these subjects make use of this special relationship to form a de facto dominant and subordinate relationship between them, which leads to the transformation of affiliated guarantee into an important channel for the transmission of interests, while the traditional contract law, The law of guarantee and other laws are also helpless to this situation, in addition, the amount of guarantee of affiliated guarantee is much larger and more common than the general amount of guarantee, so the guarantee of affiliated guarantee is also more harmful than the general guarantee. The emergence of corporate affiliated guarantee is closely related to the emergence of affiliated companies, which is a normal economic phenomenon. It plays an important role in expanding the operating scale of the company, improving the overall competitiveness of the company and maintaining the long-term development of the company. However, when confirming the benefits of affiliated guarantee, it should also take into account that once the affiliated guarantee is not reasonably regulated, The unfair related guarantee will pose a great threat to the market economy monitoring and stable business order. It is precisely this, the law of our country has also carried on the special stipulation to it. However, due to the imperfection of the current relevant legal system, there are still many problems, which lead to the widespread existence and expansion of unfair affiliated guarantee, which seriously destroys the independent personality system of our company and infringes on the company. The interests of minority shareholders and creditors of a company. Therefore, for the original neutral system of affiliated guarantee, when recognizing its favorable side, how to effectively prevent the occurrence of unfair affiliated guarantee from the legal point of view and regulate it reasonably. It is not only the current legal theory circle, but also the urgent need to discuss and need to be solved in this paper. This paper takes the regulation of affiliated guarantee, especially unfair affiliated guarantee, as a clue throughout the full text, and makes a systematic analysis of the current legal system of our country. Based on the protection of the interests of companies, minority shareholders, creditors and other stakeholders, this paper examines the relevant legislation and systems in other countries and regions. On this basis, based on the national conditions of our country, this paper puts forward some relevant legal suggestions to regulate the related guarantee in our country. According to the above ideas, this paper can be divided into five parts: the first part mainly analyzes the current legal system of affiliated guarantee in our country, and puts forward the existing problems. The second part mainly introduces the relevant legal system of regulating affiliated guarantee in other countries and regions. The third part mainly compares the similarities and differences between the relevant legal systems of regulating affiliated guarantee in our country and other countries and regions, and the reasons for the similarities and differences, and finally gives the overall thinking of regulating the related guarantee of companies in our country. The fourth part is combined with the overall thinking of the third part, put forward some suggestions to improve the current legal system in our country. The last part is a summary of this paper.
【學位授予單位】：西南政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 容纓;我國上市公司關(guān)聯(lián)擔保的立法規(guī)制與完善[J];法律適用;2005年05期

2 孫淑云;;論公司關(guān)聯(lián)擔保的法律規(guī)制[J];管理世界;2006年06期

3 朱慈蘊;資本多數(shù)決原則與控制股東的誠信義務(wù)[J];法學研究;2004年04期

4 陳致陽;公司對外提供擔保中的法律問題[J];企業(yè)經(jīng)濟;2004年04期

5 康茜;;關(guān)聯(lián)擔保效力研究及立法思考[J];商場現(xiàn)代化;2007年34期

6 李建偉;;公司關(guān)聯(lián)擔保規(guī)制的制度變遷與政策選擇——兼論法律規(guī)制的目標與方法[J];商事法論集;2006年02期

7 孫淑云;擔保法司法解釋第四條爭議之我見[J];山西大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2002年03期

8 邱本，崔建遠;論私法制度與社會發(fā)展[J];天津社會科學;1995年03期

9 朱謙;論對從屬公司債權(quán)人的法律保護[J];外國經(jīng)濟與管理;1999年02期

10 茅院生,李建偉;公司對外擔保行為的效力[J];現(xiàn)代法學;2004年01期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前1條

1 虞政平;[N];人民法院報;2003年

本文編號：2478999