本文選題：有限合伙　切入點：合伙人身份的轉(zhuǎn)變　出處：《湘潭大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：2006年修訂的《合伙企業(yè)法》的亮點之一就是規(guī)定了有限合伙制度。在有限合伙制度中,兩類合伙人身份轉(zhuǎn)變會對合伙企業(yè)、其他合伙人以及債權(quán)人產(chǎn)生較大的影響,因而尤為重要。雖然《合伙企業(yè)法》第82條至84條對兩類合伙人身份轉(zhuǎn)變制度作出了規(guī)定,但其在內(nèi)容上仍存在許多不足之處,如身份轉(zhuǎn)變條件的設(shè)置不合理、身份發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)變時間的認(rèn)定不明確、對債權(quán)人利益的保護(hù)不充足等。對于兩類合伙人身份發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)變的條件,《合伙企業(yè)法》僅規(guī)定了實體條件,即在有限合伙企業(yè)中,兩類合伙人身份發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)變,合伙協(xié)議有約定的按合伙協(xié)議的約定進(jìn)行,合伙協(xié)議沒有約定的需經(jīng)全體合伙人的一致同意。但僅規(guī)定實體條件是不足以解決司法實踐中因轉(zhuǎn)變條件而引發(fā)的相關(guān)問題,因此我們必須對程序條件加以規(guī)定,即要求兩類合伙人身份發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)變必須進(jìn)行變更登記,這就需要立法者在今后的立法修法過程中加以完善。對于兩類合伙人身份發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)變的時間,《合伙企業(yè)法》并沒有明確規(guī)定。身份轉(zhuǎn)變時間的認(rèn)定不僅決定著兩類合伙人的權(quán)利義務(wù),同時影響著兩類合伙人身份轉(zhuǎn)變前后對合伙企業(yè)債務(wù)的承擔(dān),還對債權(quán)人利益的實現(xiàn)有著較大的影響。因此,立法機(jī)關(guān)應(yīng)盡快確定兩類合伙人身份轉(zhuǎn)變時間的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),保持法律的嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)性,避免法律脫離實際。對于這個問題,應(yīng)在《合伙企業(yè)法》中規(guī)定以有限合伙企業(yè)將合伙人變動情況到有關(guān)登記機(jī)關(guān)進(jìn)行登記作為對外發(fā)生法律效力的時間點。對于兩類合伙人身份發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)變后的責(zé)任承擔(dān)問題,不少學(xué)者認(rèn)為應(yīng)區(qū)別對待。普通合伙人轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)橛邢藓匣锶?法律規(guī)定其對身份轉(zhuǎn)變前的債務(wù)承擔(dān)無限連帶責(zé)任,對身份轉(zhuǎn)變后的債務(wù)承擔(dān)有限責(zé)任,學(xué)界對此也表示了認(rèn)同。學(xué)界的爭議主要集中在有限合伙人轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)槠胀ê匣锶藭r的責(zé)任承擔(dān)問題上,認(rèn)為要求其對身份轉(zhuǎn)變前的債務(wù)承擔(dān)無限連帶責(zé)任有失公平。事實上,法律這樣規(guī)定并沒有不公平之處,也沒有違背當(dāng)時責(zé)任原則,反而是對當(dāng)時責(zé)任原則的變通適用。因此,有限合伙人的身份發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)變之后,應(yīng)該對身份轉(zhuǎn)變前后的合伙企業(yè)債務(wù)承擔(dān)無限連帶責(zé)任。對于債權(quán)人的利益保護(hù)問題,《合伙企業(yè)法》沒有考慮周全,在法律中沒有對普通合伙人轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)橛邢藓匣锶藭r債權(quán)人的利益保護(hù)作出特別規(guī)制,需要在今后的立法修法時對其進(jìn)行完善。我們可以要求有限合伙企業(yè)在兩類合伙人身份發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)變時必須履行告知義務(wù)或者要求提供相應(yīng)的擔(dān)保,以此來維護(hù)兩類合伙人身份轉(zhuǎn)變過程中債權(quán)人的利益。
[Abstract]:One of the highlights of the 2006 revision of the Partnership Enterprises Act provides for a limited partnership system.In the limited partnership system, the two types of partnership change will have a greater impact on the partnership, other partners and creditors, so it is particularly important.Although articles 82 to 84 of the Partnership Enterprise Law provide for the two types of transformation system of partnership identity, there are still many deficiencies in its content, such as unreasonable setting of the conditions for identity change.Identification of identity change time is not clear, the protection of creditors' interests is inadequate.The Law on Partnership Enterprises provides only substantive conditions for the transformation of the identity of the two types of partners, that is, in a limited partnership, the identity of the two types of partners is changed, and the partnership agreement is agreed upon in accordance with the agreement of the partnership agreement.If the partnership agreement is not agreed upon, it is subject to the unanimous consent of all the partners.However, it is not enough to specify substantive conditions to solve the related problems caused by changing conditions in judicial practice. Therefore, we must stipulate the procedural conditions, that is to say, change registration must be carried out when two types of partners change their identities.This needs the legislator in the future legislation revision process to be consummated.The Partnership Act does not specify when the two types of partnerships change.The determination of the time of identity change not only determines the rights and obligations of the two types of partners, but also affects the commitment of the partnership debts before and after the change of the identity of the two types of partners, and also has a great impact on the realization of the interests of creditors.Therefore, the legislature should determine as soon as possible the criteria for determining the time of transformation of the two types of partners, maintain the rigor of the law, and avoid the law being divorced from reality.To this problem, it should be stipulated in the "Partnership Enterprise Law" that the change of partners in a limited partnership should be registered with the relevant registration authority as the time point for the external legal effect to be brought into effect.Many scholars think that the two types of partners should be treated differently.The general partner is transformed into a limited partner, and the law stipulates that the general partner bears unlimited joint and several liability for the debts before the status change and the limited liability for the debt after the status change, which has been recognized by the academic circles.The controversy in academic circles mainly focuses on the problem of liability when limited partners are transformed into general partners, and it is unfair to require them to assume unlimited joint liability for debts before identity change.In fact, this provision is not unfair, nor violates the principle of responsibility at the time, but it is the adaptation of the principle of responsibility at that time.Therefore, after the change of identity, the limited partner should bear unlimited joint and several liability for the partnership debt before and after the change of identity.As for the protection of creditors' interests, the Partnership Enterprise Law does not take into account the interests of creditors. In the law, there is no special regulation on the protection of the interests of creditors when a general partner is converted into a limited partner.It needs to be perfected in the future legislative amendment.We can require the limited partnership to perform the obligation of informing or to provide the corresponding guarantee when the two types of partners change, so as to safeguard the interests of the creditors in the process of the transformation of the two types of partners.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(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)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張輝;;有限合伙人的責(zé)任庇護(hù)——美國經(jīng)驗與中國實踐[J];上海政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(法治論叢);2010年06期

2 郝玉強(qiáng);俞佳稚;何鋒年;;有限合伙人法律風(fēng)險防范[J];首席財務(wù)官;2009年02期

3 王保樹;;有限合伙人的有限責(zé)任:風(fēng)險分配與債權(quán)人保護(hù)[J];法學(xué)研究;2008年06期

4 王玉虎;;談有限合伙人的權(quán)利保護(hù)——從《合伙企業(yè)法》出發(fā)[J];河北企業(yè);2008年01期

5 范健;;引入有限責(zé)任合伙(LLP)制度的立法思考[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報;2007年06期

6 袁碧華;;新《合伙企業(yè)法》退伙制度的若干立法盲點與克服[J];法學(xué)雜志;2007年04期

7 袁碧華;;新《合伙企業(yè)法》有限合伙制度的立法缺陷與克服[J];國際經(jīng)貿(mào)探索;2007年06期

8 胡改蓉;;有限責(zé)任合伙制度中對債權(quán)人的特別保護(hù)措施[J];中國商法年刊;2006年00期

9 李有星;;論有限合伙人身份識別法律制度[J];中國商法年刊;2006年00期

10 王建文;范健;;論公司獨立人格的內(nèi)在依據(jù)與制度需求[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2006年05期

，

本文編號：1730045