完善股东回购请求权价格认定制度的探讨——以日本法为参照
发布时间：2019-03-30 18:52
【摘要】：完善股东回购请求权价格认定制度主要涉及两个方面。第一,在立法层面对我国现行公司法进行查漏补缺,包括:适度扩大有限公司股东请求定价权的行使范围,明确我国《公司法》第14 3条第1款第4项亦适用"合理价格"之规定;参照日本法,规定第143条回购请求权的行使期间为合并分立协议生效前的一定期间;明确赋予法院定价裁量权。第二,在司法实践中对价格认定整理出一套合理的操作程序,包括:对鉴定结论或评估报告适当甄别,在法院自主定价时首先明确"基准点",即对非上市公司股东的回购请求一般以请求时为基准,对上市公司异议股东的回购请求则应按组织变更给企业价值带来的效果,以合并分立协议生效时或决议时为基准;确立一套合理的计算方法,即对非上市公司采用DCF法和资产法为主,由法院进行司法估价,而对上市公司股份定价时,应以上述基准时的市场价格为基础,然后以一至三个月为计算期间进行估算。
[Abstract]:There are two main aspects to improve the pricing system of shareholder repurchase claim. Firstly, in the aspect of legislation, we should investigate and fill the gaps in the current company law of our country, including: properly expanding the scope of the exercise of the shareholders' right to request the pricing of a limited company; It is clear that the provisions of "reasonable price" are also applied in paragraph 1 (4) of Article 143 of the Company Law of our country; Referring to the Japanese law, the exercise period of the right of repurchase claim is defined as a certain period before the merger and separation agreement comes into effect, and the court is given the discretion of pricing clearly. Second, in judicial practice, we should sort out a set of reasonable operating procedures for price determination, including proper screening of appraisal conclusions or assessment reports, and first defining the "benchmark point" when the courts set their own prices. That is to say, the repurchase request to the shareholders of the non-listed company is generally based on the request time, and the repurchase request to the dissenting shareholders of the listed company should be based on the effect of the organizational change on the value of the enterprise, on the basis of the entry into force of the merger and separation agreement or the resolution; To establish a set of reasonable calculation methods, that is to say, the DCF method and the assets method should be adopted to the non-listed company, and the court should make the judicial evaluation. The market price of the listed company should be based on the above-mentioned benchmark market price when pricing the shares of the listed company. The calculation period is then calculated from one to three months.
【作者单位】： 华东政法大学国际金融法律学院;
【基金】：上海市第三期重点学科——经济法学(项目编号:S30902)的中期成果
【分类号】：D922.291.91;D931.3
[Abstract]:There are two main aspects to improve the pricing system of shareholder repurchase claim. Firstly, in the aspect of legislation, we should investigate and fill the gaps in the current company law of our country, including: properly expanding the scope of the exercise of the shareholders' right to request the pricing of a limited company; It is clear that the provisions of "reasonable price" are also applied in paragraph 1 (4) of Article 143 of the Company Law of our country; Referring to the Japanese law, the exercise period of the right of repurchase claim is defined as a certain period before the merger and separation agreement comes into effect, and the court is given the discretion of pricing clearly. Second, in judicial practice, we should sort out a set of reasonable operating procedures for price determination, including proper screening of appraisal conclusions or assessment reports, and first defining the "benchmark point" when the courts set their own prices. That is to say, the repurchase request to the shareholders of the non-listed company is generally based on the request time, and the repurchase request to the dissenting shareholders of the listed company should be based on the effect of the organizational change on the value of the enterprise, on the basis of the entry into force of the merger and separation agreement or the resolution; To establish a set of reasonable calculation methods, that is to say, the DCF method and the assets method should be adopted to the non-listed company, and the court should make the judicial evaluation. The market price of the listed company should be based on the above-mentioned benchmark market price when pricing the shares of the listed company. The calculation period is then calculated from one to three months.
【作者单位】： 华东政法大学国际金融法律学院;
【基金】：上海市第三期重点学科——经济法学(项目编号:S30902)的中期成果
【分类号】：D922.291.91;D931.3
【共引文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 赵晓华,潘凤焕;控制股东忠实义务探析[J];北京市经济管理干部学院学报;2003年03期
2 李薇;上市公司非公平关联交易下利益转移问题的研究[J];财会通讯(学术版);2004年12期
3 刘烨;我国上市公司关联交易盈余管理解析[J];财经理论与实践;2001年05期
4 李明辉;简论中小股东利益的保护[J];当代经济研究;2001年08期
5 刘桂清;;股东对董事之直接诉讼——对新公司法第153条法理基础的反思与重构[J];法学评论;2006年03期
6 王保树,杨继;论股份公司控制股东的义务与责任[J];法学;2002年02期
7 陈四清,丁岩,陆猛;关联关系分析在银行授信管理中的应用[J];国际金融研究;2002年08期
8 赵晓华,赵宝奇;控制股东:公司法框架下的责任重构[J];河北法学;2004年05期
9 王泽霞,张连锋,冯，
本文编号：2450382
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/gongsifalunwen/2450382.html
