【摘要】：法諺有云，“有權(quán)利必有救濟(jì)”，否則權(quán)利形同虛設(shè)。對權(quán)利擁有者來說，權(quán)利無法得到保障，必然會受到無辜侵害。具體到《公司法》中，關(guān)于有限責(zé)任公司股利分配請求權(quán)的保護(hù)就是一個很好的例證。從應(yīng)然層面而言，《公司法》作為現(xiàn)代市場經(jīng)濟(jì)法制體系中的重要組織部分，應(yīng)當(dāng)充分體現(xiàn)平等權(quán)、市民權(quán)等權(quán)利本位法的特性和商法追求意思自治、自由、盈利的價值精神。但遺憾的是，在我國公司理論、制度和實(shí)踐中，關(guān)于有限責(zé)任公司中小股東股利分配請求權(quán)的保護(hù)一直很不到位。在理論方面，我國學(xué)術(shù)界對該制度的重視程度還不夠，研究股利分配請求權(quán)的論文、著作等還處于剛剛起步階段，數(shù)量上不是很多，質(zhì)量上也有待進(jìn)一步提高；在制度方面，我國《公司法》和其他一些相關(guān)法律法規(guī)對股利分配請求權(quán)保護(hù)制度的規(guī)定不健全，有些規(guī)定甚至比較原則，根本不具有現(xiàn)實(shí)的可操作性，制度的規(guī)定與現(xiàn)實(shí)明顯存在脫節(jié)；在實(shí)踐方面，隨著我國經(jīng)濟(jì)的高速發(fā)展，企業(yè)的數(shù)量不斷增加，利益糾紛的可能性也在不斷增多。當(dāng)公司股東的股權(quán)尤其是股利分配請求權(quán)受到控股股東或者董事會不分配或者少分配決策的侵害，制度的缺失或者不具有可操作性的法律規(guī)定使得公司中的中小股東只能面臨現(xiàn)實(shí)的侵害而無可奈何。這不僅不利于激發(fā)中小股東的投資熱情，更不利于企業(yè)的長遠(yuǎn)發(fā)展，對中國市場經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展必定會造成阻礙�！豆痉ā窂�(qiáng)調(diào)商事主體的意思自治，包括制定公司章程。但是中小股東投資公司是為了獲取股利，賺取利益。如果公司控股股東利用資本多數(shù)決原則，打著自治的名義侵害中小股東的利益，不向中小股東分配股利，那么，不僅中小股東投資的愿望可能落空，同時，如果允許法律任意強(qiáng)制性地介入公司的事情，也會與《公司法》的意思自治原則相沖突。由此可見，如何處理好這種關(guān)系，事關(guān)重大。有鑒于此，本文著力以有限責(zé)任公司股東股利分配請求權(quán)為研究對象，以中國公司治理和股東維權(quán)為立足點(diǎn)和出發(fā)點(diǎn)，借鑒國外先進(jìn)的立法、司法和實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)，以期能夠在理論、制度和實(shí)踐中為我國有限責(zé)任公司中小股東股利分配請求權(quán)的保護(hù)提供有益借鑒。 全文除引言和結(jié)語外，共分五個部分： 第一部分，案例及問題的引出。本部分以典型案例作為切入點(diǎn)，提出有限責(zé)任公司股東股利分配請求權(quán)被侵害的問題，對公司意思自治與法院強(qiáng)制介入的關(guān)系以及有限責(zé)任公司中小股東如何獲得司法救濟(jì)進(jìn)行了相應(yīng)思考，從而引出探討有限責(zé)任公司股利分配請求權(quán)的意義與價值。 第二部分，有限責(zé)任公司股利分配請求權(quán)的基本理論。本部分具體包括三個方面的內(nèi)容：第一，股利分配請求權(quán)的定義；第二，股利分配請求權(quán)的特征；第三，股利分配請求權(quán)的實(shí)現(xiàn)方式。本部分主要是對股利分配請求權(quán)的相關(guān)理論知識作簡要概述，，從而為進(jìn)一步闡述論點(diǎn)予以鋪墊。 第三部分，我國《公司法》對股利分配請求權(quán)保護(hù)的制度缺陷。本部分結(jié)合我國《公司法》的具體規(guī)定，剖析了我國在相關(guān)方面存在的立法缺陷，具體包括以下內(nèi)容：第一，公司章程自治的保護(hù)缺陷；第二，股東會決議無效、可撤銷之訴的保護(hù)缺陷；第三，異議股東的股利回購請求權(quán)的保護(hù)缺陷；第四，控股股東違反誠信義務(wù)的損害賠償?shù)谋Ｗo(hù)缺陷。 第四部分，有限責(zé)任公司股利分配求權(quán)的比較法考察。本部分通過對美國、英國和法國有限責(zé)任公司股利分配請求權(quán)法律規(guī)定的考察，對我國相關(guān)制度的完善提供了借鑒。 第五部分，完善我國有限責(zé)任公司股利分配請求權(quán)的建議。本部分主要包括四個方面的內(nèi)容：第一，強(qiáng)化公司章程事先協(xié)議意識；第二，建立強(qiáng)制分配股利訴訟制度；第三，重構(gòu)股份回購請求權(quán)要件；第四，限制股東資本多數(shù)決原則。
[Abstract]:As the legal proverb goes, "the right must have remedies", otherwise the right is in vain. As for the owner of the right, the right can not be guaranteed, and will inevitably be innocent infringement. Specifically, in the Company Law, the protection of the right to dividend distribution of limited liability company is a good example. As a modern city, the Company Law is a good example. The important part of the legal system of the field economy should fully embody the characteristics of the right-based law of equality and civil rights and the value spirit of the commercial law in pursuit of autonomy of will, freedom and profit. In theory, the academic circles of our country have not paid enough attention to the system, the research papers and works on the right of dividend distribution are still in the initial stage, the quantity is not very large, and the quality needs to be further improved; in the system, the company law and other relevant laws and regulations on the dividend distribution request. In practice, with the rapid development of China's economy, the number of enterprises is increasing, and the possibility of interest disputes is also increasing. It is the right of dividend distribution that is infringed by the decision of the controlling shareholder or the board of directors not to distribute or to distribute less. The lack of the system or the non-operational legal provisions make the small and medium shareholders in the company only face the actual infringement and have no alternative. This is not conducive to stimulating the investment enthusiasm of the small and medium shareholders, but also not conducive to the enterprise. The long-term development of China's market economy is bound to be hindered. stresses the autonomy of commercial subjects, including the formulation of articles of association. If the interest does not distribute dividends to the minority shareholders, the desire of the minority shareholders to invest may be frustrated. At the same time, if the law is allowed to intervene in the affairs of the company arbitrarily and compulsively, it will also conflict with the principle of autonomy of will in the Company Law. The right to claim for dividend distribution of any shareholder of a company is the research object. Based on the Chinese company's governance and the shareholder's rights protection, the author draws lessons from foreign advanced legislation, judicature and practical experience in order to provide useful reference for the protection of the right to claim for dividend distribution of minority shareholders in China's limited liability company in theory, system and practice.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the paper is divided into five parts.
The first part is the introduction of cases and problems. This part takes typical cases as the breakthrough point, puts forward the infringement of the shareholders'right to dividend distribution in limited liability company, ponders the relationship between the autonomy of the will of the company and the compulsory intervention of the court, and how the minority shareholders in limited liability company obtain judicial relief, thus leads to discussion. The meaning and value of limited company's right to dividend distribution.
The second part is the basic theory of the right to claim for dividend distribution in a limited liability company. This part includes three aspects: first, the definition of the right to claim for dividend distribution; second, the characteristics of the right to claim for dividend distribution; third, the realization of the right to claim for dividend distribution. A brief overview is made to lay the groundwork for further elaboration.
In the third part, the system defect of the protection of the right to claim for dividend distribution in the Company Law of our country is analyzed. Combining with the specific provisions of the Company Law of our country, this part analyzes the legislative defects existing in the relevant aspects, including the following contents: first, the protection defect of the autonomy of the articles of association; second, the protection of the invalid resolution of the shareholders'meeting and the revocable action. Defects; Thirdly, the dissident shareholder's dividend repurchase claim protection defects; Fourthly, the controlling shareholder's breach of the obligation of good faith damages protection defects.
The fourth part is a comparative study of the right of dividend distribution in limited liability companies.This part provides a reference for the improvement of the relevant system in China by investigating the legal provisions of the right of dividend distribution in limited liability companies in the United States, Britain and France.
This part mainly includes four aspects: first, strengthening the consciousness of prior agreement in the articles of association; second, establishing a compulsory dividend distribution litigation system; third, reconstructing the elements of the right to claim share repurchase; fourth, restricting the majority rule of shareholders'capital.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 蔣大興;;公司自治與裁判寬容——新《公司法》視野下的裁判思維[J];法學(xué)家;2006年06期

2 馬俊駒,林曉鎳;有限責(zé)任公司股東的法律救濟(jì)[J];河南師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2001年04期

3 趙學(xué)剛;;有限責(zé)任公司利潤分配制度研究[J];開發(fā)研究;2006年05期

4 朱慈蘊(yùn);資本多數(shù)決原則與控制股東的誠信義務(wù)[J];法學(xué)研究;2004年04期

5 郭婭麗;;完善股利分配請求權(quán)的思路[J];理論探索;2008年06期

6 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(哲學(xué).人文科學(xué).社會科學(xué)版);2005年01期

7 張輝;;公司股東股利分配請求權(quán)的思考[J];商業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)與管理;2007年05期

8 劉云霞;;股東利潤分配請求權(quán)的定性和司法救濟(jì)[J];中國商界(下半月);2009年01期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前3條

1 中國政法大學(xué)教授、博士生導(dǎo)師 趙旭東;[N];人民法院報;2002年

2 王欣新;[N];人民法院報;2007年

3 中國人民大學(xué)法學(xué)院民商法博士研究生 宋尚華;[N];人民法院報;2008年

本文編號：2236635

suoshi