本文關(guān)鍵詞：股東投票權(quán)價(jià)購問題之檢討　出處：《河北大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 投票權(quán) 投票權(quán)價(jià)購 公司治理

【摘要】：投票權(quán)價(jià)購早已有之，不過是The Schreiber court針對Schreiber v. Carney案例開始對投票權(quán)價(jià)購予以界定，并改變了完全禁止投票權(quán)價(jià)購的態(tài)度，，對于通過TheSchreiber court分析的投票權(quán)價(jià)購持允許態(tài)度。美國特拉化州關(guān)于投票權(quán)價(jià)購司法實(shí)踐變革給予各國對于投票權(quán)價(jià)購的規(guī)制提供了經(jīng)驗(yàn)性參考，結(jié)合我國臺灣地區(qū)對于投票權(quán)價(jià)購規(guī)制的變遷，最初我國禁止投票權(quán)價(jià)購符合時(shí)宜，但是隨著證券市場的發(fā)展，公司治理機(jī)制的完善，新型公司問題的不斷出現(xiàn)，允許投票權(quán)價(jià)購，構(gòu)建投票權(quán)價(jià)購的規(guī)制機(jī)制已經(jīng)是我國立法所面臨的重要課題。 本文引入投票權(quán)價(jià)購的定義，明確投票權(quán)價(jià)購對于公司治理以及股東財(cái)富的重大意義。檢討反對投票權(quán)價(jià)購理由，得出結(jié)論：無論是從平等、異化、效率還是成本角度來看，已經(jīng)提出的完全禁止投票權(quán)價(jià)購理由并不成立。本文介紹了美國特拉化州關(guān)于投票權(quán)價(jià)購司法實(shí)踐變革，評述了The Schreiber court分析，借鑒了臺灣地區(qū)對于投票權(quán)價(jià)購的規(guī)制經(jīng)驗(yàn)，結(jié)合投票權(quán)價(jià)購的在我國的實(shí)踐現(xiàn)狀、現(xiàn)行立法和規(guī)章的態(tài)度，針對未來趨勢進(jìn)而提出構(gòu)建我國投票權(quán)價(jià)購制度的建議，以期對于我國投票權(quán)價(jià)購的立法完善起到些許作用。
[Abstract]:Voting price has long been available, but it was The Schreiber court that began defining the price of voting in the Schreiber v. Carney case. And changed the total ban on voting price buying attitude. Through TheSchreiber. Court analysis of the voting price purchase attitude. The United States of America on the legal practice of voting price purchase to the United States to provide empirical reference to the regulation of price purchase of voting rights. Combined with the change of the regulation of voting price purchase in Taiwan area, the prohibition of voting price purchase in our country is timely at first, but with the development of securities market and the perfection of corporate governance mechanism. With the emergence of new company problems, it is an important subject for legislation in China to allow voting price to buy and to set up the regulation mechanism of voting price purchase. This paper introduces the definition of voting price purchase, clarifies the significance of voting price purchase to corporate governance and shareholder wealth. Review the reasons against voting price purchase, and draw a conclusion: whether from equality, alienation. From the point of view of efficiency or cost, the reason that has been put forward to prohibit voting price purchase is not valid. This paper introduces the reform of judicial practice of voting price purchase in the United States of America. This paper reviews the analysis of The Schreiber court, draws lessons from Taiwan's experience in regulating voting price purchase, and combines the practical situation of voting price purchase in China. In view of the future trend, the author puts forward some suggestions on the construction of China's voting price purchase system in the light of the current legislation and regulations, in order to play a little role in perfecting the legislation of voting price purchase in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D922.291.91;D922.28;F832.51

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 湯春來;公司民主的實(shí)現(xiàn)與治理機(jī)制的完善[J];湖北廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2003年01期

2 王繼軍;股份有限公司累積投票制度研究[J];中國法學(xué);1998年05期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 丁紹寬;公司投票機(jī)制的法律經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)分析[D];華東政法大學(xué);2008年

本文編號：1401440