本文選題：公司法 + 越權(quán)　； 參考：《中國(guó)政法大學(xué)》2002年碩士論文

【摘要】： 商法只不過(guò)是對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)生活中之基本規(guī)律的提煉而已。因此，法律賴以存在的經(jīng)濟(jì)生活發(fā)生變化后，該變化必然需要反映到法律上來(lái)。公司法上的越權(quán)行為原則地位之變遷，即反映了這一點(diǎn)。 然而，我國(guó)的立法者似乎對(duì)此反映遲鈍，而法學(xué)理論之研究也不夠深入，對(duì)越權(quán)行為的基本概念沒(méi)有形成共識(shí)，更不用說(shuō)如何借鑒他國(guó)的越權(quán)行為制度。本文試圖運(yùn)用概念法學(xué)、比較法學(xué)、歷史法學(xué)、法哲學(xué)等基本方法，建立越權(quán)行為的基本概念和體系，分析越權(quán)行為的地位變遷之原因，，并對(duì)如何完善我國(guó)商事主體之立法，提出自己的粗淺意見(jiàn)。 本文共分三章。第一章之第一部分，分析了英美法上以及大陸法上的越權(quán)行為的基本含義，以及我國(guó)學(xué)者對(duì)此的不同認(rèn)識(shí)。本文認(rèn)為公司越權(quán)行為是指公司超越其權(quán)利能力范圍的行為，并由此將越權(quán)行為區(qū)分為公司越權(quán)行為和董事越權(quán)行為。第一章之第二部分考察了越權(quán)行為原則的興起與變革。在變革部分主要介紹了英國(guó)、美國(guó)以及歐盟的一些立法上的重大變化。本文第二章之第一部分分析了越權(quán)行為原則的地位變遷的原因。越權(quán)行為原則的興起主要是為了保護(hù)股東及債權(quán)人之利益，而越權(quán)行為原則之衰落之根本原因是經(jīng)濟(jì)基礎(chǔ)之變化，本文根據(jù)層次之不同，將之區(qū)分為現(xiàn)實(shí)的原因，功能上的原因以及商法理念變遷的原因。第二章之第二部分分析了公司越權(quán)行為之效力，第三部分析了董事越權(quán)行為之效力以及如何進(jìn)行歸責(zé)與規(guī)制。本文第三章第一部分考察了我國(guó)立法及司法部門對(duì)該問(wèn)題的態(tài)度，同時(shí)對(duì)我國(guó)立法上的經(jīng)營(yíng)范圍與英美法上的越權(quán)行為制度作一比較分析。第二部分提出本文的立法修改之建議。 本文結(jié)論指出，就一般的商事公司而言，沒(méi)有必要規(guī)定經(jīng)營(yíng)范圍，從而在根本上廢除越權(quán)行為原則，但為衡平起見(jiàn)，可以賦予股東以訴權(quán)。
[Abstract]:Commercial law is nothing more than refining the basic laws of economic life. Therefore, after the change of economic life on which the law depends, the change must be reflected in the law. The vicissitude of the principle of ultra vires in company law reflects this point. However, China's legislators seem to be slow to respond to this, and the study of legal theory is not deep enough, and there is no consensus on the basic concept of ultra vires behavior, let alone how to learn from the system of ultra vires behavior of other countries. This paper attempts to establish the basic concept and system of ultra vires by using the basic methods of conceptual jurisprudence, comparative jurisprudence, historical jurisprudence and legal philosophy, and to analyze the reasons for the changes of the status of ultra vires acts, and how to perfect the legislation of commercial subjects in our country. Put forward one's own shallow opinions. This paper is divided into three chapters. The first part of the first chapter analyzes the basic meaning of ultra vires in Anglo-American law and continental law, as well as the different understandings of Chinese scholars. In this paper, the author points out that the ultra vires behavior of a company means that the company exceeds the scope of its right ability, and thus the ultra vires act is divided into the ultra vires act of the company and the ultra vires action of the director. The second part of Chapter one examines the rise and change of the principle of ultra vires. The change part mainly introduces some major legislative changes in the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union. The first part of the second chapter analyzes the reasons for the change of the status of the principle of ultra vires. The rise of the principle of ultra vires is mainly to protect the interests of shareholders and creditors, and the fundamental cause of the decline of the principle of ultra vires is the change of the economic base. The functional reason and the reason of the change of the commercial law idea. The second part of the second chapter analyzes the effectiveness of corporate ultra vires, the third part analyzes the effectiveness of directors' ultra vires and how to impute and regulate. The first part of this paper examines the attitude of our legislative and judicial departments to this issue, and makes a comparative analysis of the scope of our legislation and the system of ultra vires in British and American law. The second part puts forward the suggestion of legislative amendment in this paper. The conclusion of this paper is that it is not necessary for the general commercial company to stipulate the scope of operation, so as to abolish the principle of ultra vires conduct fundamentally, but for the sake of balance, shareholders may be given the right of action.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2002
【分類號(hào)】：D912.29

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 郭瓊,肖偉志;論企業(yè)法人越權(quán)與法定代表人越權(quán)[J];河北法學(xué);2001年03期

2 徐民;論公司行為和越權(quán)原則[J];海南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1994年01期

3 李建華,許中緣;法人越權(quán)行為原則的再認(rèn)識(shí)[J];法制與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2001年02期

4 董峻峰;董事越權(quán)代表公司法律問(wèn)題研究[J];中外法學(xué);1997年01期

5 凌相權(quán),王天習(xí);試論對(duì)公司越權(quán)交易的法律對(duì)策[J];政法論壇;1993年03期

6 方流芳;;公司審批制度與行政性壟斷——兼論中國(guó)公司法的走向[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);1992年04期

7 張學(xué)文;董事越權(quán)代表公司法律問(wèn)題研究[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2000年03期

本文編號(hào)：1929803