论股东优先购买权制度

发布时间：2018-07-07 11:36

本文选题：有限责任公司 + 股东优先购买权　；参考：《西南财经大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 我国《公司法》规定了有限责任公司股东优先购买权制度。文章对此制度的价值基础,意义,进行阐述,进一步阐释在股东优先购买权行使过程中的法律冲突,试图找到解决的途径,并提出了立法展望。本文除导论和结语外,共分四部分。第一部分,阐述此制度的意义：有利于解决股东争端,防范股东突出风险,节约交易成本,有利于股东实现对公司得控制权。即使一个国家的公司法没有规定股东的优先购买权,也并不表明该国家立法对股东优先购买权的否定。通常而言,常常许可公司在章程、内部规定或股东间协议中自行约定是否设定优先购买权。我国公司立法的应然目标是维护有限责任公司股东的合理期待和有限责任公司资合性和人合性的协调。第二部分,阐述股东优先购买权的行使必须满足相应条件：1、股东向第三人转让出资；2、须以同等条件行使,包含价格条件和支付条件,但如何确定同等条件,何时确定同等条件却成为了司法实践中的难题。本文就同等条件的确定进行了详细阐述。对于股东优先购买权能否部分行使,《公司法》也未作规定。虽然《公司法》没有明文禁止股东不能部分行使优先购买权,但对于未规定的事项不能一律采用“法不禁止即自由”的解释规则,能否部分‘行使优先购买权,应当取决于转让出资的股东。另外股东优先购买权属于其他股东的专有权利,具有一定的人身依附性,一般不允许转让。但是,允许股东优先权转让体现了法律的公平和正义价值。第三部分,论述在股东优先购买权行使的过程中存在的诸多法律冲突,比如当有限责任公司股东在民事诉讼中成为被执行人,其股权被法院依法执行时,其他股东行使优先购买权将可能遭遇法律障碍；在企业国有股权转让的问题上,国资委和财政部的《暂行办法》显然忽视了非国有股东的权利,将其对国有股权转让的同意权与优先购买权完全排除了,从而与《公司法》存在明显的冲突；以继承方式取得股权符合继承法的规定,但是继承人能否直接通过行使继承权取得股权,又属于继承法调整的范畴。股份有限责任公司因其资合性特征,其股权继承没有什么问题。而有限责任公司因其兼具人合和资合的特征,如果继承人当然取得股权恐怕有悖于有限责任公司人台的属性。但如果不允许继承人通过行使继承权取得股权,又违反了继承法的规定,侵犯了公民的继承权。我国现行公司法对这个矛盾尚未明确作出合理解决的规定,继承法和司法解释由于出台较早,也没有涉及此问题的规定。对于拍卖,强制执行,国有股权转让以及股权继承中优先购买权行使的问题,进行了详细阐述,并提出了相依的解决方案。第四部分,立法展望。就目前而言,我国理论界对股东优先购买权的研究比较欠缺,文章对于我国的股东优先购买权得立法完善提出了建议： 1、对章程有关股份转让作出原则性规定,增加合理限制原则,明确不同意股东购买条件,充分发挥同意权对股份转让限制功能。 2、通过司法解释明确优先购买权行使的同等条件的具体内容。增加合理限制原则,以价格为中心,有限责任公司股份转让的同等条件的内容和解释应本着有利于拟转让股份股东股权的充分实现为原则,许可转让人自行选择包括转让价格,支付方式,支付期限。本文可能的创新之处体现在：论述了在股东优先购买权行使过程中遇到的法律冲突的解决方案。对于强制执行进行拍卖的股权,为保障股东优先购买权和竞拍人的权利,建议在确定同等条件时,考虑在拍卖前对竞买人瑕疵告知,并咨询其他股东的意愿价格,然后进行拍卖,当高于此价格时,优先购买权人丧失权利,由竞买人获得股权,若低于此价格,则由优先购买权人获得该股权。
[Abstract]:The company law of China stipulates the system of shareholder preemption of the limited liability company. The article expounds the value basis and significance of this system, further explains the legal conflict in the process of the exercise of the right of the shareholder's preemption, tries to find the way to solve it, and puts forward the prospect of the legislative exhibition. This article is divided into four parts except the introduction and conclusion.
The first part expounds the significance of the system: it is beneficial to the settlement of shareholders' disputes, the prevention of the risk of the shareholders, the saving of the transaction costs, and the benefit of the shareholders to control the company. Even if the company law of a country does not stipulate the right of preemption of the shareholders, it does not indicate the negation of the legislation of the country to the shareholders' right of preemption. The company usually permits the company to set up the right of preemption in the articles of association, internal regulations or inter shareholder agreements. The objective of our company's legislation is to maintain the reasonable expectation of the shareholders of the limited liability company and the coordination of the cooperation and human nature of the limited liability company.
The second part, the exercise of the shareholders' right of preemption must meet the corresponding conditions: 1, shareholders transfer capital to third persons; 2, it must be exercised on the same condition, including price conditions and payment conditions. But how to determine the same conditions and when to determine the same conditions has become a difficult problem in judicial practice. This article is to determine the same conditions. If the company law does not expressly prohibit the shareholders from partially exercising the right of preemption, the company law does not apply the rules of interpretation of "no prohibition or freedom" for the unspecified matters, and whether or not part of the exercise of the right of preemption should be taken. In addition, the shareholder's right of preemption belongs to the exclusive rights of other shareholders. It has a certain personal attachment and generally does not allow the transfer. However, the transfer of the priority of the shareholders embodies the fair and just value of the law.
The third part discusses the legal conflicts that exist in the process of the exercise of the right of the shareholder's preemption, for example, when the shareholders of a limited liability company become the executor in the civil action, when the equity is executed by the court according to law, the other shareholders may encounter the legal obstacles to the exercise of the right of preemption; in the issue of the transfer of the state-owned shares of the enterprise, The Interim Measures of the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Finance clearly ignore the rights of non state shareholders, completely exclude the consent and preemption of the transfer of state-owned shares, and thus have a clear conflict with the company law; the acquisition of shares in the way of inheritance is in conformity with the provisions of the inheritance law, but is whether the successor can directly obtain the right to inherit. Stock ownership is also a category of succession law adjustment. Because of its characteristic of equity, shares of a limited liability company has no problem of equity inheritance. The limited liability company, because of its characteristics of concurrently human and capital, is afraid of the property of the limited liability company, but if the heir does not allow the successor to pass the line It has violated the provisions of the inheritance law and violated the provisions of the inheritance law and violated the right to inherit the citizens. The current company law in China has not made a clear solution to this contradiction. The inheritance law and judicial interpretation have not been stipulated in the introduction of the law. The exercise of priority right in China is expounded in detail, and solutions are put forward.
The fourth part is the prospect of legislation. As far as we are concerned, the research on the right of preemption of shareholders is short in the theoretical circles of our country. The article puts forward some suggestions on the legislative perfection of the right of the shareholder's preemption in our country.
1, the articles of association on the transfer of shares in principle, to increase the principle of reasonable restrictions, clearly disagree with the conditions for the purchase of shareholders, and give full play to the right to restrict the transfer of shares.
2, to clarify the specific content of the equal conditions of the exercise of the right of preemption through judicial interpretation. Increase the principle of reasonable restriction, take the price as the center, the content and interpretation of the equal conditions of the shares transfer of the limited liability company, should be in accordance with the principle of full realization of the share stockholder's equity in favor of the quasi transfer of shares, and the transferor chooses to include the transfer price on its own. Case, payment method, time limit for payment.
The possible innovations in this article are as follows: the solution of the legal conflict encountered in the process of the exercise of the right of the shareholder's preemption is discussed. In order to guarantee the shareholders' right of preemption and the right of the bidder for the equity of the compulsory execution of the auction, it is suggested that when the same conditions be determined, the defects of the bidders before the auction are considered, and the consultation is considered. The price of the other shareholders and then the auction, when the price is higher than that, the preemption person loses the right and the bidder obtains the equity. If the price is lower than that, the preemption owner obtains the stock.
【学位授予单位】：西南财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D922.291.91

【参考文献】