本文關(guān)鍵詞：股東會決議瑕疵的法律規(guī)制　出處：《武漢大學》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 股東會決議 法律行為 意思表示 效力 公司自治

【摘要】：股東會決議是公司意思自主形成及全體股東權(quán)益民主行使的重要載體。股東會決議作為實現(xiàn)公司自治的重要工具,仍以意思表示為核心,具有私法性、目的性和設(shè)權(quán)性,是法律行為。但股東會決議具有團體性、商事性和程序性的特點,其行為主體、意思形成機制以及效力范圍、價值取向等均具有不同于合同行為和共同行為的特點,是特殊類型的法律行為。相應(yīng)地,法律行為的效力瑕疵規(guī)則不能完全適用于股東會決議瑕疵類型的判斷及其瑕疵事由的認定。我國《公司法》第22條規(guī)定了決議無效和可撤銷這兩種瑕疵類型,有悖于法學理論與法律邏輯,不能有效適應(yīng)司法實務(wù)的需求。決議不成立是對決議客觀上不存在所作的事實上的判斷,與決議無效、決議可撤銷的法律屬性、價值取向、瑕疵表征以及法律效果等均不相同,應(yīng)當作為獨立的瑕疵類型,即成立瑕疵。股東會決議成立要件包括決議因具備召集主體、議決主體和待決事項而被認定為確有舉行,以及股東作出表決并達到定足數(shù)而被認定為客觀形成,欠缺成立要件的決議應(yīng)被認定為決議不成立,實踐中常見的事由包括股東會未實際召開或由無召集權(quán)人召集、股東會召開前未通知全體股東、股東會作出的決議是偽造的或未達到法定的表決數(shù)。對股東會決議效力的判斷集中于考查其程序是否嚴謹公正,內(nèi)容是否合法合章。股東會決議可撤銷的事由表現(xiàn)為股東會會議召集程序瑕疵、股東會決議方法瑕疵以及決議內(nèi)容違反章程,建議在適用《公司法》第22條第2款時結(jié)合立法目的進行限縮解釋,即只有股東會決議程序上的瑕疵有妨害或有妨害異議股東實體權(quán)利之虞時才具備可撤銷事由,從而保障公司自治與決策效率,防止股東濫用撤銷權(quán)。就股東會決議的無效認定,主要表現(xiàn)為股東會的決議事項超越了職權(quán),決議減損了債權(quán)人利益或嚴重侵犯了其他股東的法定權(quán)利,或者存在濫用資本多數(shù)決的情形。建議遵循司法的謙抑性,將無效事由限縮解釋為內(nèi)容違反"法律、行政法規(guī)效力性強制性規(guī)定"的無效,在識別強制性規(guī)范時,綜合運用語義識別、類型化思維和個案分析等方法,以達致國家強制與公司自治的動態(tài)平衡,舒緩公平與效率的緊張關(guān)系。
[Abstract]:Shareholders' meeting resolution is an important carrier for the formation of autonomy and the democratic exercise of the rights and interests of all shareholders. As an important tool to realize corporate autonomy, the resolution of shareholders' meeting still takes the expression of intention as the core and has the nature of private law. The purpose and the establishment of power are legal acts. However, the resolution of shareholders' meeting has the characteristics of group, commercial and procedural, its subject, the mechanism of will formation and the scope of its validity. The value orientation and so on all have the characteristic which is different from the contract behavior and the common behavior, is the special type legal behavior. The defect rule of legal act can not be fully applied to the judgment of the defect type of the shareholders' meeting resolution and the determination of the cause of the defect. Article 22 of the Company Law of our country stipulates that the resolution is invalid and revocable. Contrary to the legal theory and legal logic, can not effectively adapt to the needs of judicial practice. The resolution is not established objectively does not exist for the resolution of the fact of judgment, and the resolution is invalid, the resolution can be revoked legal attributes. The value orientation, defect representation and legal effect are all different, and should be regarded as the independent defect type, that is, the founding defect. The resolution subject and the pending matter are recognized as holding, and the shareholders vote and reach the fixed number and are determined to be objectively formed, and the resolution lacking the elements of establishment should be considered as the resolution not to be established. The common events in practice include that the shareholders' meeting has not actually been convened or convened by the person without convening authority, and the shareholders' meeting has not been notified to all shareholders before the meeting is held. The resolution made by the shareholders' meeting is forged or has not reached the legal voting number. The judgment on the validity of the resolution of the shareholders' meeting focuses on the examination of whether its procedure is rigorous and fair. Whether the content is legal or not. The resolution of shareholders' meeting can be revoked by the shareholders' meeting convening procedure defects, shareholders' meeting resolution method defects and the content of the resolution violation of the articles of association. It is suggested that the article 22 (2) of the Company Law should be interpreted in conjunction with the legislative purpose. That is, only if the defects in the resolution procedure of shareholders' meeting are prejudiced or the substantive rights of dissenting shareholders are threatened, can there be revocable reasons, so as to ensure the autonomy of the company and the efficiency of decision-making. To prevent shareholders from abusing the rescission right. The main manifestation of the invalidation of shareholders' meeting resolution is that the resolution of shareholders' meeting exceeds its authority, and the resolution derogates from the interests of creditors or seriously infringes the legal rights of other shareholders. Or there exists the situation of abusing capital majority decision. It is suggested that the judicial modesty be followed, and the limitation of invalidity be interpreted as invalid if the content violates the mandatory provisions on the validity of the law and administrative regulations. In order to achieve the dynamic balance between national compulsion and corporate autonomy and ease the tension between fairness and efficiency, the methods of semantic identification, typological thinking and case analysis are used in the identification of mandatory norms.
【學位授予單位】：武漢大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王雷;;公司決議行為瑕疵制度的解釋與完善——兼評公司法司法解釋四(征求意見稿)第4～9條規(guī)定[J];清華法學;2016年05期

2 沈嚴;溫占敏;;變相分配公司資產(chǎn)的股東會決議無效[J];人民司法;2015年22期

3 郭棟;;中國民法典制定的法哲學反思——第七屆全國部門法哲學研討會綜述[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;2015年04期

4 王雷;;論民法中的決議行為 從農(nóng)民集體決議、業(yè)主管理規(guī)約到公司決議[J];中外法學;2015年01期

5 鄧江源;;股東壓制視野中的股東會決議效力[J];人民司法;2014年15期

6 許中緣;;論意思表示瑕疵的共同法律行為——以社團決議撤銷為研究視角[J];中國法學;2013年06期

7 張旭榮;;法律行為視角下公司會議決議效力形態(tài)分析[J];比較法研究;2013年06期

8 康玉奇;;淺析小股東權(quán)利的法律保護——惡意串通隱瞞小股東的股東會決議無效[J];法制與社會;2012年21期

9 蔣建湘;;商法強制性規(guī)范的類型、性質(zhì)與邊界[J];法學雜志;2012年07期

10 葉林;;股東會會議決議形成制度[J];法學雜志;2011年10期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前3條

1 劉素霞;;偽造簽名的股東會決議應(yīng)不受撤銷時效限制[N];檢察日報;2012年

2 馬小新;;未召開股東會形成的決議效力如何[N];人民法院報;2010年

3 劉俊海;;股東濫用資本多數(shù)決所作股東會決議無效[N];人民法院報;2006年

，

本文編號：1406404