發(fā)布時間：2018-01-15 07:00

  本文關(guān)鍵詞：股東申請解散公司案件法律問題研究　出處：《安徽大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 司法解散 公司僵局 解散公司 股東利益

【摘要】：公司司法解散是與行政解散相對的另外一種強(qiáng)制解散制度,是指通過有權(quán)人提出解散之訴,由法院做出解散公司的判決,從而導(dǎo)致公司解散的后果①。對此,我國《公司法》第182條對該制度作出了規(guī)定,賦予了股東向法院申請解散公司的請求權(quán)。在此背景下,股東申請解散公司案件不斷發(fā)生,而法院在處理此類案件也存在缺憾之處,這些缺憾包括:同類案件得不到相同處理、和解與調(diào)解結(jié)案率低、過于依賴解散手段等。通過對股東申請解散公司的案例進(jìn)行對比分析,可以歸納出此類案件的共同爭議焦點。爭議焦點主要有三點:1、關(guān)于"公司經(jīng)營管理是否遇到嚴(yán)重困難"的認(rèn)定。該爭議焦點的主要爭議在于"嚴(yán)重困難"中的"嚴(yán)重"缺乏合理標(biāo)準(zhǔn),筆者主張以是否發(fā)生公司僵局作為判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn),主張只有發(fā)生公司僵局股東方可申請解散公司,單純的股東壓迫案件法院不應(yīng)認(rèn)定為公司經(jīng)營管理出現(xiàn)嚴(yán)重困難;對于股東壓迫與公司僵局的界限問題應(yīng)根據(jù)股東單方實力和公司治理機(jī)制的關(guān)系進(jìn)行綜合考量。2、關(guān)于"公司繼續(xù)存續(xù)是否會使股東利益受到重大損失"的判斷。對于公司經(jīng)營狀況而言,最重要的就是公司未來預(yù)期。公司的未來預(yù)期雖大致確定,但也有改變可能。如果法院能運用調(diào)解手段盡可能的修復(fù)此類股東關(guān)系人合性裂縫,那么就可能降低公司成本,改善公司未來的預(yù)期,從而更好的保護(hù)股東利益。因此,調(diào)解是維護(hù)股東利益的有效途徑,調(diào)解的方式上可以考慮做一些技術(shù)性的處理,以提高調(diào)解的成功率。3、關(guān)于應(yīng)否解散公司問題。有學(xué)者認(rèn)為解散公司是保護(hù)股東利益的重要措施,或是破解公司僵局的最徹底措施。這些看法既忽略了解散公司本身對股東利益的巨大破壞作用,也忽略了部分股東有可能從強(qiáng)制解散公司結(jié)果中不當(dāng)獲利的事實。因此僅僅解散公司而不作出針對原告與被告過錯行為的懲罰是不夠的。懲罰是保護(hù)弱勢股東利益的需要,也是從根本上破解公司僵局的需要,具有懲罰性是司法解散制度的顯著優(yōu)勢,司法主動查清股東的某些過錯行為與節(jié)約司法資源兩目標(biāo)是可以兼容的。
[Abstract]:The judicial dissolution of the company and relative administrative dissolution in a compulsory dissolution system, refers to the right of the dissolution of the lawsuit, the court made the decision to dissolve the company, leading to the consequences of the dissolution of the company. In this regard, China's company law > 182nd < on the system of regulations, gives shareholders to apply to the court for the right to request the dissolution of the company. Under this background, the shareholders for company dissolution cases continue to occur, but the court in dealing with such cases has shortcomings, these deficiencies include: similar cases are not the same, reconciliation and mediation. The case rate is low, is too dependent on the dissolution method. Through the comparative analysis of the shareholders the application of company dissolution case, summarizes the common focus of controversy in such cases. The focus of controversy has three main points: 1. The identification of the company management is serious trouble ". The main focus of controversy To the dispute is "serious difficulties" in the "serious" lack of reasonable standards, the author advocates that whether the company deadlock as the judgment standard, argues that only the deadlocks shareholders may apply for dissolution of the company, the shareholder oppression court should not be recognized as the company management serious difficulties; boundary problem for company deadlock and oppression the.2 should be comprehensive consideration according to the relationship between shareholder unilateral strength and the mechanism of corporate governance, "the company continues to exist on whether it will be significant losses to the interests of shareholders" judgment. For the operation of the company, the most important is that the company's future expectations. The company's future expectations is roughly determined, but there may change if the court. Can the use of mediation means to repair relations with such shareholders may crack, so it is possible to reduce the cost of the company, improve the company's future expectations, from To better protect the interests of shareholders. Therefore, mediation is an effective way to protect the interests of the shareholders, mediation can be considered to do some processing technology, in order to improve the success rate of mediation in.3, on the question of the dissolution of the company. Some scholars believe that the dissolution of the company is an important measure to protect the interests of the shareholders, or is the most radical measures the company deadlock. Both these views ignore the dissolution of the company itself to the interests of shareholders of the huge damage, it also ignores the part of shareholders may result from improper compulsory disbandment of company profit facts. Therefore only the dissolution of the company and not made for the plaintiff and the defendant fault behavior is not enough punishment. The punishment is to protect the interests of vulnerable the shareholders, but also the need to fundamentally solve the company deadlock, which is a significant advantage of punitive system of judicial dissolution, the judicial initiative to identify some fault behavior of shareholders It is compatible with the two goal of saving judicial resources.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

中國期刊全文數(shù)據(jù)庫 前1條

1 于苗苗;;公司解散清算制度問題之分析[J];商;2016年08期

中國博士學(xué)位論文全文數(shù)據(jù)庫 前2條

1 馮靜;商法基本原則的選擇與司法運用[D];華東政法大學(xué);2015年

2 賴武;公司僵局論[D];吉林大學(xué);2009年

中國碩士學(xué)位論文全文數(shù)據(jù)庫 前3條

1 路麗瑩;公司人合性內(nèi)涵研究[D];貴州民族大學(xué);2016年

2 劉暢;有限責(zé)任公司僵局的法律解決機(jī)制研究[D];長春工業(yè)大學(xué);2015年

3 王琴麗;公司司法解散的案例分析[D];西南政法大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號：1427253