發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-04 00:26

  本文選題：道德責(zé)任 + 司法適用��； 參考：《昆明理工大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：傳統(tǒng)理論認(rèn)為,公司是以盈利為目的的企業(yè)法人,只為了追求利潤(rùn)最大化,不應(yīng)該承擔(dān)社會(huì)責(zé)任,社會(huì)責(zé)任由社會(huì)單方面承擔(dān)。現(xiàn)代社會(huì)中公司的影響力越來越重要。于是,企業(yè)承擔(dān)相應(yīng)的社會(huì)責(zé)任對(duì)和諧社會(huì)有著重大作用被許多國(guó)家認(rèn)同。按照沒有無義務(wù)的權(quán)利理論即要享受權(quán)利必須承擔(dān)相應(yīng)的義務(wù),公司也要承擔(dān)社會(huì)責(zé)任。20世紀(jì)初,“公司社會(huì)責(zé)任”最先被美國(guó)提出,引起了巨大討論。我國(guó)開始關(guān)注公司社會(huì)責(zé)任時(shí)間上晚于西方國(guó)家并且理論薄弱,很多問題沒有達(dá)成共識(shí),司法實(shí)踐非常少。需要順應(yīng)國(guó)際形勢(shì)將公司社會(huì)責(zé)任納入司法實(shí)踐保障公司社會(huì)責(zé)任的實(shí)施,由司法力量來確保公司社會(huì)責(zé)任的實(shí)現(xiàn)。文章以公司社會(huì)責(zé)任司法化的基本理論展開研究,理論是基礎(chǔ),只有理論的支持才能有司法實(shí)踐。由于國(guó)外研究公司社會(huì)責(zé)任比較早,有豐富的實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)和案例。我國(guó)有很多可以借鑒的。所以從國(guó)內(nèi)外學(xué)者對(duì)公司社會(huì)責(zé)任內(nèi)涵的界定、性質(zhì)、研究著手分析,提出公司社會(huì)責(zé)任司法適用的論題。我們雖然在很多公司社會(huì)責(zé)任研究上沒有達(dá)成相同意見。但是我國(guó)公司社會(huì)責(zé)任司法化已經(jīng)有了法律依據(jù),這也說明我國(guó)是承認(rèn)公司社會(huì)責(zé)任的。法律條文表明我國(guó)公司社會(huì)責(zé)任是司法適用的條件。接著分析我國(guó)公司部分逃避社會(huì)責(zé)任,使得公共利益受到損害,公司社會(huì)責(zé)任司法適用的實(shí)際情況不容客觀,分析原因,找出缺陷。在強(qiáng)化我國(guó)公司社會(huì)責(zé)任司法適用的必要性,再次說明司法適用是法律得以落實(shí)的最有力的保障。最后通過立法方面、法解釋學(xué)、司法審查、完善公益訴訟、比較美國(guó)公司社會(huì)責(zé)任案例制度,建立我國(guó)特色的案例指導(dǎo)制度等方式強(qiáng)化我國(guó)公司社會(huì)任司法適用。
[Abstract]:The traditional theory holds that the company is an enterprise legal person whose aim is to make profit, only to pursue the profit maximization, should not undertake the social responsibility, the social responsibility is assumed by the society unilaterally. The influence of companies is becoming more and more important in modern society. Therefore, the enterprise undertakes the corresponding social responsibility has the important function to the harmonious society by many countries. According to the theory of right without obligation, to enjoy the right must bear the corresponding obligation, and the company must also bear the social responsibility. At the beginning of the 20th century, "corporate social responsibility" was first put forward by the United States, which caused a great deal of discussion. China began to pay attention to corporate social responsibility later than western countries and weak theory, many issues have not reached consensus, judicial practice is very little. It is necessary to incorporate corporate social responsibility into judicial practice to ensure the implementation of corporate social responsibility, and to ensure the realization of corporate social responsibility by judicial force. This paper studies on the basic theory of corporate social responsibility judicature, theory is the foundation, only the support of theory can have judicial practice. Because foreign research company social responsibility is early, has the rich practice experience and the case. Our country has a lot to learn from. Therefore, from the domestic and foreign scholars on the definition of corporate social responsibility, nature, research and analysis, put forward the topic of corporate social responsibility judicial application. Although we do not agree on many corporate social responsibility studies. However, there is a legal basis for the judicalization of CSR in our country, which indicates that CSR is recognized in our country. The legal provisions show that corporate social responsibility is the condition of judicial application. Then, the author analyzes that some companies in our country avoid social responsibility, which damages the public interest, and the actual situation of the judicial application of corporate social responsibility is not objective, analyzes the reasons and finds out the defects. In strengthening the necessity of the judicial application of corporate social responsibility in our country, it is proved once again that the judicial application is the most effective guarantee for the implementation of the law. Finally, through legislation, legal hermeneutics, judicial review, improve public interest litigation, compare the case system of corporate social responsibility in the United States, and establish a case guidance system with Chinese characteristics, strengthen the judicial application of corporate social responsibility in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：昆明理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳明添;公司的社會(huì)責(zé)任——對(duì)傳統(tǒng)公司法基本理念的修正[J];東南學(xué)術(shù);2003年06期

2 劉俊海;《公司法》的修改與解釋:以司法權(quán)的適度干預(yù)為中心[J];法律適用;2005年03期

3 顏運(yùn)秋;公司利益相關(guān)者派生訴訟的理論邏輯與制度構(gòu)建[J];法商研究;2005年06期

4 謝曉堯,吳思罕;論一般條款的確定性[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2004年03期

5 譚玲;梁展欣;;對(duì)司法裁判中適用“公司社會(huì)責(zé)任”條款的思考[J];法治論壇;2010年01期

6 李嘉寧;胡改蓉;;企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任:基于不完全契約與動(dòng)態(tài)平衡理論的思考[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年05期

7 亢石梅;;企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任的界定[J];牡丹江大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年12期

8 史際春;肖竹;馮輝;;論公司社會(huì)責(zé)任:法律義務(wù)、道德責(zé)任及其他[J];首都師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年02期

9 陳留彬;;中國(guó)企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任評(píng)價(jià)實(shí)證研究[J];山東社會(huì)科學(xué);2007年11期

10 張榮霞;;公司社會(huì)責(zé)任的界定及其法理分析[J];商業(yè)時(shí)代;2010年24期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 韓宇;科技發(fā)展與企業(yè)社會(huì)責(zé)任問題研究[D];渤海大學(xué);2014年

，

本文編號(hào)：1840775