公司章程“另有規(guī)定”研究
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-09-03 06:40
【摘要】：公司章程“另有規(guī)定”作為缺省性規(guī)則的一種,調(diào)和著強(qiáng)制性與任意性規(guī)范,被視為公司法規(guī)范的“緩沖帶”。作為公司法應(yīng)然性規(guī)范的構(gòu)成之一,其價(jià)值在公司實(shí)務(wù)中不可小覷,2005年《公司法》修訂將“另有規(guī)定”擴(kuò)展為現(xiàn)有6條,在現(xiàn)代公司法主張公司自治的背景面前似乎顯得過于狹隘,對(duì)解決公司法在實(shí)踐發(fā)展中遇到的問題還是遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠的。在世界各國強(qiáng)調(diào)公司自治的大趨勢下,我國公司法中任意性條款存在的比例顯然還不能完全與發(fā)達(dá)國家公司法立法相媲美,對(duì)于缺省性條款的運(yùn)用不夠?qū)掗�。以合同理論說為法理基礎(chǔ)的公司法條文,我國公司法對(duì)缺省性規(guī)則的小范圍適用并沒能發(fā)揮其作為合同范本高效便利的價(jià)值。 現(xiàn)代公司自治的廣度取決于公司法的定性,公司法的私法品質(zhì)意味著公司法規(guī)范中任意性條款占比大于強(qiáng)制性條款,這就意味著公司治理者有著更多的空間實(shí)現(xiàn)意思自治。公司自治的深度取決于公司法規(guī)范應(yīng)然性結(jié)構(gòu)的設(shè)計(jì),章程“另有規(guī)定”作為缺省性規(guī)則的一種,給予公司治理者相對(duì)的選擇以排除公司法預(yù)設(shè)的規(guī)定,在一定程度上間接拓寬公司自治的空間。章程中“另有規(guī)定”條款的多少取決于強(qiáng)制性條款與任意性條款之間的妥當(dāng)平衡。2014年我國《公司法》的修改中未見對(duì)缺省性規(guī)則的修改及增加。而我國《公司法》章程“另有規(guī)定”作為缺省性規(guī)則,其運(yùn)用的范圍應(yīng)不止《公司法》現(xiàn)有的6條。 本文通過借鑒國外及臺(tái)灣地區(qū)的公司法缺省性規(guī)范設(shè)計(jì),結(jié)合其當(dāng)下的立法背景,重點(diǎn)分析關(guān)于股東會(huì)與董事會(huì)層面的公章程“另有規(guī)定”條款。作為公司運(yùn)營核心的股東會(huì)與董事會(huì),其中章程“另有規(guī)定”的設(shè)計(jì)從側(cè)面體現(xiàn)了公司自治的開放度。對(duì)比我國公司法現(xiàn)有條款,在實(shí)體方面,如股權(quán)、繼承、利潤分配等股東自益權(quán)方面的規(guī)定大同小異,基本都尊重股東意思自治,由股東自已設(shè)計(jì)經(jīng)濟(jì)權(quán)利的分配規(guī)則。在程序方面,國外類似章程“另有規(guī)定”的條款則有更大的開放度,諸多程序性規(guī)則的設(shè)計(jì)更為具體兼顧人性化理念,在保護(hù)股東權(quán)利的同時(shí)也更多考慮義務(wù)的承擔(dān),如股東大會(huì)的出席人數(shù)、會(huì)議召開地點(diǎn)、董事會(huì)人數(shù)與年齡等限制大多用缺省性條款來設(shè)計(jì)。借鑒上述缺省性規(guī)定可彌補(bǔ)我國《公司法》在程序性規(guī)范上的設(shè)計(jì)缺陷。試想我國《公司法》是否可以在公司治理模式、股東會(huì)、董事會(huì)議事、召集、表決等相關(guān)的程序性事項(xiàng)及獨(dú)立董事制度中不足之處做出補(bǔ)充，完善程序和制度存在的先天缺失，將其微調(diào)成章程“另有規(guī)定”，，大大加強(qiáng)這些條款的彈性，把握我國當(dāng)下以市場配置資源為中心的改革要求，同世界立法潮流與時(shí)俱進(jìn)?
[Abstract]:As one of the default rules, the articles of Association, which reconcile the mandatory and arbitrary norms, are regarded as the "buffer zone" of the company law norms. As one of the components of the standard of company law, its value can not be underestimated in the company practice. In 2005, the amendment of the Company Law expanded the "additional provisions" to six existing articles. In the background of modern company law advocating corporate autonomy, it seems too narrow, which is far from enough to solve the problems encountered in the practice and development of company law. Under the trend of emphasizing corporate autonomy in many countries in the world, the proportion of arbitrariness clauses in our company law is obviously not comparable to that in developed countries, and the application of default clauses is not wide enough. On the basis of the theory of contract, the small scope application of the default rules in the company law of our country has not brought into full play the value of its efficiency and convenience as a contract model. The breadth of modern corporate autonomy depends on the qualitative nature of the company law. The private law quality of the company law means that the proportion of arbitrary clauses in company law norms is greater than that of mandatory provisions, which means that the corporate governance has more space to realize autonomy of will. The depth of corporate autonomy depends on the design of the required structure of company law norms. As a default rule, the articles of association, as a kind of default rule, give the relative choice to the corporate governance to exclude the preset provisions of the company law. To a certain extent, indirectly widen the space of corporate autonomy. The number of "additional provisions" in the articles of association depends on the proper balance between the mandatory clause and the arbitrary clause. The default rules have not been amended and added in the amendment of the Company Law of China in 2014. As a default rule, the articles of Association of Company Law of our country should apply more than the existing 6 articles of Company Law. By referring to the default normative design of company law in foreign countries and Taiwan and combining its current legislative background, this paper focuses on the articles of association of shareholders' meeting and board of directors, which are "otherwise stipulated". As the core of the company's operation, the shareholders' meeting and the board of directors, the design of the articles of association reflects the openness of the company's autonomy. Comparing with the existing provisions of the Company Law of our country, the provisions of the shareholders' self-interest rights, such as equity, inheritance, profit distribution and so on, are mostly the same, and they all basically respect the autonomy of the shareholders' will, and the shareholders themselves design the distribution rules of the economic rights. In terms of procedure, foreign articles such as the articles of association "otherwise stipulated" have greater openness, and many procedural rules are designed in a more concrete way to give consideration to the concept of humanization, and to protect the rights of shareholders and to take into account more obligations. For example, the number of attendees, the venue of the meeting, the number of board members and the age limit are mostly designed by default clause. Drawing on the above default provisions can make up for the design defects in the procedural norms of the Company Law of China. Consider whether the Company Law of our country can supplement and perfect the procedure and system of the company governance model, shareholders' meeting, board of directors' meeting, convocation, voting and other relevant procedural matters and the deficiencies of the independent director system, and perfect the inherent defects of the procedure and system. Will its fine adjustment into the articles of association "other provisions", greatly strengthen the flexibility of these provisions, grasp the current market allocation of resources as the center of China's reform requirements, with the world legislative trend with the times?
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.91
本文編號(hào)：2219204
[Abstract]:As one of the default rules, the articles of Association, which reconcile the mandatory and arbitrary norms, are regarded as the "buffer zone" of the company law norms. As one of the components of the standard of company law, its value can not be underestimated in the company practice. In 2005, the amendment of the Company Law expanded the "additional provisions" to six existing articles. In the background of modern company law advocating corporate autonomy, it seems too narrow, which is far from enough to solve the problems encountered in the practice and development of company law. Under the trend of emphasizing corporate autonomy in many countries in the world, the proportion of arbitrariness clauses in our company law is obviously not comparable to that in developed countries, and the application of default clauses is not wide enough. On the basis of the theory of contract, the small scope application of the default rules in the company law of our country has not brought into full play the value of its efficiency and convenience as a contract model. The breadth of modern corporate autonomy depends on the qualitative nature of the company law. The private law quality of the company law means that the proportion of arbitrary clauses in company law norms is greater than that of mandatory provisions, which means that the corporate governance has more space to realize autonomy of will. The depth of corporate autonomy depends on the design of the required structure of company law norms. As a default rule, the articles of association, as a kind of default rule, give the relative choice to the corporate governance to exclude the preset provisions of the company law. To a certain extent, indirectly widen the space of corporate autonomy. The number of "additional provisions" in the articles of association depends on the proper balance between the mandatory clause and the arbitrary clause. The default rules have not been amended and added in the amendment of the Company Law of China in 2014. As a default rule, the articles of Association of Company Law of our country should apply more than the existing 6 articles of Company Law. By referring to the default normative design of company law in foreign countries and Taiwan and combining its current legislative background, this paper focuses on the articles of association of shareholders' meeting and board of directors, which are "otherwise stipulated". As the core of the company's operation, the shareholders' meeting and the board of directors, the design of the articles of association reflects the openness of the company's autonomy. Comparing with the existing provisions of the Company Law of our country, the provisions of the shareholders' self-interest rights, such as equity, inheritance, profit distribution and so on, are mostly the same, and they all basically respect the autonomy of the shareholders' will, and the shareholders themselves design the distribution rules of the economic rights. In terms of procedure, foreign articles such as the articles of association "otherwise stipulated" have greater openness, and many procedural rules are designed in a more concrete way to give consideration to the concept of humanization, and to protect the rights of shareholders and to take into account more obligations. For example, the number of attendees, the venue of the meeting, the number of board members and the age limit are mostly designed by default clause. Drawing on the above default provisions can make up for the design defects in the procedural norms of the Company Law of China. Consider whether the Company Law of our country can supplement and perfect the procedure and system of the company governance model, shareholders' meeting, board of directors' meeting, convocation, voting and other relevant procedural matters and the deficiencies of the independent director system, and perfect the inherent defects of the procedure and system. Will its fine adjustment into the articles of association "other provisions", greatly strengthen the flexibility of these provisions, grasp the current market allocation of resources as the center of China's reform requirements, with the world legislative trend with the times?
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.91
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條
1 伍堅(jiān);;論公司法上的缺省性規(guī)則——兼評(píng)新《公司法》相關(guān)規(guī)定之得失[J];法學(xué);2007年05期
2 趙忠奎;;公司章程“另有規(guī)定”之司法裁判邏輯[J];安徽大學(xué)法律評(píng)論;2012年01期
3 胡穎穎;;再論公司章程之“另有規(guī)定”[J];江西金融職工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2010年03期
4 錢玉林;;公司章程“另有規(guī)定”檢討[J];法學(xué)研究;2009年02期
5 蔣大興,金劍鋒;論公司法的私法品格——檢視司法的立場[J];南京大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué).人文科學(xué).社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年01期
6 伍堅(jiān);;缺省性公司法規(guī)則的角色:基于股東自治缺陷的分析[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年02期
7 羅培新;;公司法強(qiáng)制性與任意性邊界之厘定:一個(gè)法理分析框架[J];中國法學(xué);2007年04期
本文編號(hào)：2219204
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/jingjifalunwen/2219204.html
最近更新
教材專著
