股东派生诉讼当事人地位研究

发布时间：2018-05-14 06:01

本文选题：派生诉讼 + 股东　；参考：《兰州大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 公司法确立的股东派生诉讼制度,其目的在于当公司利益受损却怠于不能行使诉权时,给与中小股东一项寻求公力救济的程序性权利,以更好的保护公司乃至股东的权益。在股东派生诉讼制度的设置中,当事人法律地位的确定是当前立法亟待解决的问题。而我国在该问题的许多方面都缺乏明确的法律规定,给法律实务带来难题。文章在分析我国相关立法现状的同时,参考国外理论与实践经验,对构建我国股东派生诉讼制度提出若干修改性意见,以供探讨。文章第一部分介绍了股东派生诉讼制度的概念、特征,分析了该制度的存在价值与功能,从而在宏观上对该制度有了概括的了解。进而引出当今各国派生诉讼制度当事人诉权的理论,对债权人代位权说、受益权说、股东权说理论之利弊进行了分析,论证了派生诉讼中当事人诉权的合理性。文章第二部分就派生诉讼的原告资格展开论述,在对各国原告股东资格适格条件进行比较的基础上,对我国原告股东资格条件进行了论述。同时试图在鼓励派生诉讼的提起与防止恶意滥诉讼之间寻找一个合适的平衡点,因而又论述了原告滥用诉权的表现欲防止措施。文章认为我国应借鉴美国的“当时所有权原则”与“净手原则”,明确规定原告在诉讼中的权利与责任,提出对我国派生诉讼中原告当事人法律地位的完善建议。文章第三部分论述了派生诉讼中被告当事人的法律地位。在关于被告范围的界定问题上,各国均有不同的规定,尤其是“他人”的范围如何界定存在争议。域外对此问题的立场,有以美国为代表的自由式和以德、日为代表的限制式两种立法。我国法律中将“他人”规定为“侵害公司利益”的主体显得过于宽泛,给公司正常经营模式带来隐患,同时存在对诉讼资源浪费的可能。派生诉讼被告范围应包括董事、监事、高级管理人员。“他人”的范围应界定为发起人、清算人、控股股东、实际控制人和与公司经营层利益一致为公司服务的中介机构,而公司外部人如债务人、侵犯公司利益的行政机关等则不包括在内。各国关于公司在派生诉讼中的法律地位,规定各有不同。文章第四部分论述了公司参与派生诉讼的必要性,并以美国、日本、韩国为例,深入分析了公司在派生诉讼中的地位。同时比较了我国当前对此问题的各方观点之利弊,提出我国法律在对公司参诉地位进行设计时,应借鉴日本的辅助参加人制度,同时对我国民事诉讼法中无独立请求权第三人制度进行修改,以设计出更为适合我国国情的公司法律地位制度。文章第五部分以美国、日本为例,简要论述了其他股东在派生诉讼中的法律地位,提出我国派生诉讼中其他股东法律地位的构想,对其他股东的参诉方式、参诉程序及诉讼权利进行了阐述。
[Abstract]:The purpose of the shareholder derivative litigation system established by the Company Law is to give the minority shareholders a procedural right to seek public relief when the interests of the company are damaged but they are not able to exercise the right of action, so as to better protect the rights and interests of the company and even the shareholders. In the establishment of shareholder derivative litigation system, the determination of the legal status of the parties is an urgent problem to be solved in the current legislation. However, the lack of clear legal provisions in many aspects of the problem brings difficulties to the practice of law. This paper analyzes the current situation of relevant legislation in our country, and at the same time, referring to the theory and practice experience of foreign countries, puts forward some modified opinions on the construction of shareholder derivative litigation system in China for discussion. The first part of the article introduces the concept and characteristics of the shareholder derivative litigation system, analyzes the value and function of the system, and thus has a general understanding of the system from the macro point of view. Then it leads to the theory of litigant's right of action in various countries, analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of the theory of creditor's subrogation, beneficial right and shareholder's right, and proves the rationality of litigant's right of action in derivative litigation. In the second part, the author discusses the qualification of the plaintiff in derivative litigation, and discusses the qualification of the plaintiff in China on the basis of the comparison of the qualification of the plaintiff shareholder in various countries. At the same time, the author tries to find a proper balance between encouraging derivative action and preventing malicious action, and then discusses the measures to prevent the plaintiff from abusing the right of action. The article holds that our country should draw lessons from the "current ownership principle" and "net hand principle" of the United States, clearly stipulate the rights and responsibilities of the plaintiff in the litigation, and put forward some suggestions to perfect the legal status of the plaintiff in the derivative litigation in our country. The third part discusses the legal status of the defendant in derivative action. On the definition of the scope of the defendant, different countries have different provisions, especially how to define the scope of "others" is controversial. The foreign position on this issue includes two kinds of legislation: the free style represented by the United States and the restrictive legislation represented by Germany and Japan. In the law of our country, "others" is defined as the subject of "infringing on the interests of the company", which appears to be too broad, which brings hidden trouble to the normal management mode of the company, and at the same time, there is the possibility of wasting the litigation resources. The range of defendants in derivative actions shall include directors, supervisors, and senior management personnel. The scope of "others" shall be defined as promoters, liquidators, controlling shareholders, actual controllers and intermediaries that serve the company in line with the interests of the company's management, while external persons of the company, such as the debtor, Administrative organs that infringe on the interests of the company are excluded. The legal status of companies in derivative actions varies from country to country. The fourth part discusses the necessity of company participation in derivative litigation, and takes the United States, Japan and South Korea as an example to analyze in depth the position of the company in derivative litigation. At the same time, this paper compares the advantages and disadvantages of the current views on this issue in our country, and points out that the law of our country should draw lessons from the auxiliary participant system of Japan when designing the status of corporate pleading. At the same time, the system of the third party without independent right of claim in the civil procedure law of our country is amended, in order to design the system of the legal status of the company which is more suitable for the national conditions of our country. In the fifth part, taking the United States and Japan as examples, the author briefly discusses the legal status of other shareholders in derivative litigation, puts forward the conception of the legal status of other shareholders in derivative litigation in our country, and presents the ways of pleading with other shareholders. The procedure of pleading and the right of action are expounded.
【学位授予单位】：兰州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D922.291.91

【引证文献】