母子公司中的人格否认

发布时间：2018-05-02 05:56

本文选题：公司法 + 公司法人格否认　；参考：《西南政法大学》2007年硕士论文

【摘要】： 近年来，人格否认制度一直是公司法领域内争议和讨论的热点问题。学者们围绕着人格否认制度见仁见智，各抒己见，发表相关论文和著作无数；尽管观点和论证各不相同，但可以看出：绝大部分学者在关于是否应该在我国公司法上确立人格否认制度这个问题上的意见上是一致的。2005年10月27日通过并于2006年1月正式施行的公司法修订案第20条第3款第一次在我国公司法上对人格否认制度做出了明确的规定。这条规定尽管较为原则，但对规制我国目前出现的股东滥用公司法人人格损害债权人利益的普遍现象仍有着积极意义。公司法人人格不仅仅被自然人股东所滥用，在现代社会中往往更多的是被法人股东(即母公司)所滥用。因为伴随着经济社会的剧烈变化，利用母子公司关系实行商业控制的有效手段，形成企业的集团经营已成为大型企业经营战略的重要组成部分。母子公司分别为独立的法人，独自经营、各负盈亏；但母公司是子公司的控制股东，实际控制着子公司。尤其是在全资子公司中，母公司作为惟一股东更是牢牢控制着子公司的一切。母子公司这种特征就决定了母公司极易滥用子公司的法人人格，从事高风险或高利益的经营活动，却以有限责任原则逃避法律责任，从而损害子公司债权人利益。本文从日本丰田诉重庆力帆商标侵权一案着手，分析在母子公司场合下，当母公司利用独立法人人格来逃避子公司债务时，子公司的债权人可以直接请求母公司承担连带责任。在我国企业集团中，控制母公司往往通过设立众多子公司及关联公司来达到规模经营的效益，但却以有限责任制度为挡箭牌，逃避相应的法律责任。这种做法使控制母公司享受了最大的利益却承担最小的风险，而最终受害的是广大债权人的利益和社会公共利益。显然，这违背了法的公平正义原理，也背离了公司法人制度和有限责任制度设计者们的初衷。母公司作为法人股东有不同于自然人股东的特征，同时在母子公司中适用人格否认制度还存在其他一些特殊情形；本文正是从母子公司自身的特征出发，重点分析人格否认制度在其中适用的特殊性和应注意的问题，最后结合我国的立法现状和司法实践进行分析，发现总结存在的问题并提出相关建议。本文在文章的开头提出问题后，首先对母子公司中适用人格否认制度的一般原理进行了分析阐释。在这部分里主要论述了母子公司中适用人格否认制度的原因、法定要件、主要情形、本质和结果以及在全资子公司和非全资子公司中的区别适用。同人格否认制度的一般原理一样，在母子公司中适用人格否认制度主要原因也是为了维护公平正义和诚实信用原则，具体来说是为了保护债权人利益和社会公共利益。适用的法定要件有：子公司合法成立、主体适格、存在母公司滥用公司法人格的行为并且这种行为与子公司债权人的损失之间有因果联系、债权人的损失无其他救济途径；也即在母子公司中适用人格否认制度必须严格慎重，因为该制度只是有限责任制度的有益补充，而非代替。在母子公司中滥用法人人格的行为主要归纳为以下情形：公司资本显著不足、利用公司法人人格规避法律义务、利用公司法人人格回避合同义务、公司法人人格形骸化，但不限于这几类。适用的结果是令滥用了控制权的母公司对其侵权责任承担连带责任。文章的第三部分主要分析在母子公司中适用人格否认制度的特殊性问题，主要表现在以下四个方面：首先，母子公司中存在反向“揭开公司面纱”情形，这种情形主要出现在母子公司人格混同情形下；其次，母子公司中存在两次甚至多次适用人格否认制度的情形。因为母公司的股东受有限责任保护，母公司本身也对子公司承担有限责任，如果子公司再设孙公司，如此等等，即有可能多次揭开公司面纱，，让母公司股东承担最终责任；再次，母子公司中存在董事经理“一仆二主”的现象，因为董事经理们往往同时在母子公司中任职，但却职权不分，所以当其滥用控制权造成子公司债权人损失时应该承担民事赔偿责任。但是这种责任需要法律有明确规定，而不能对其适用人格否认制度。最后，在税法、破产法、环境法、劳动法以及会计审计法、竞争法领域里，母子公司中容易出现滥用法人人格现象，因此在这些领域中也应该适用人格否认制度。文章第四部分主要分析了两种特殊类型的母子公司中是否适用人格否认制度的问题。在国有控股的母子公司中，应区别适用。纯公益性垄断性的国有企业应该单独立法，不适用公司法中的人格否认制度；而竞争性的国有控股母子公司中应该适用人格否认制度，不应例外。在跨国母子公司中母公司对子公司的控制是合法的，而且其出现本身就是因为控制的存在；因此跨国公司更易出现母公司滥用控制权现象，从而损害东道国债权人的利益。在吸引外资和维护公平正义之间东道国往往要进行利益平衡，但是否能适用人格否认制度还涉及到国家司法主权和国家利益的问题，非常复杂。解决这个问题需要国家间的协商合作，我国目前仍无相关法律规定。最后，结合我国的立法现状和司法实践进行分析评价，总结了立法中仍存在的问题，主要是人格否认制度的模糊性和不可操作性以及我国母子公司法律规定的缺失问题。因此作者建议出台相关的司法解释和制定修改配套法律法规，加强人格否认制度的可操作性和完整性。同时，针对该制度本身的缺陷和立法中不完善的地方，作者对司法实践中应注意的问题提出了建议。总之，本文的写作目的就是通过对母子公司中适用人格否认制度的特性进行分析总结，希望人格否认制度在母子公司中的运用能在司法实践中引起重视并发挥其应有的制度功能，从而真正能保护债权人利益、维护社会公平和正义。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the system of personality denial has been a hot issue in the field of corporate law. Scholars have different opinions about the system of personality denial and express their own opinions and publish numerous related papers and books. Although the views and arguments are different, it can be seen that the overwhelming majority of the scholars should make sure that the company law should be true in our country. The opinion on the issue of the system of standing personality denial is a consensus on the twentieth article of the amendment to the company law, which was formally implemented in October 27th in.2005 and formally implemented in January 2006. The first time in the third paragraph of the company law of China has made a clear regulation on the system of personality denial in our country's company law. The general phenomenon of damaging the interests of creditors with corporate personality is still of positive significance.
The corporate personality is not only abused by the shareholders of the natural person, but often misused by the legal person shareholders (the parent company) in the modern society. Because of the violent changes in the economy and society, the effective means of commercial control are carried out by the relationship between the parent and subsidiary company, and the formation of the enterprise group management has become the heavy business strategy of the large enterprise. The parent company is the independent legal person, and the parent company is the sole shareholder, but the parent company is the controlling shareholder of the subsidiary. The parent company, especially in the wholly owned subsidiary, is the only shareholder which controls all the subsidiary more firmly. The parent company determines the parent company is very indiscriminate. The corporate personality of a subsidiary is engaged in high risk or high interest operating activities, but it evade the legal responsibility by the principle of limited liability, thereby damaging the interests of the creditor of the subsidiary.
This article begins with the case of TOYOTA v. Chongqing Li Fan trademark infringement case, and analyzes that when the parent company uses an independent corporate personality to escape the debt of the subsidiary company, the creditor of the subsidiary can directly request the parent company to undertake joint and several liability when the parent company uses the independent corporate personality. In order to achieve the benefit of scale management, the affiliated company avoids the corresponding legal responsibility with the limited liability system as the shield. This practice makes the control of the largest benefit of the parent company and takes the minimum risk, and the ultimate damage is the interests of the broad creditors and the social public interests. Obviously, it violates the fairness and justice of the law. It also deviates from the original intention of the company legal person system and the designer of the limited liability system. The parent company is different from the natural shareholder as a legal person shareholder, and there are some other special situations in the system of personality denial in the parent subsidiary company. The particularity of the system and the problems that should be paid attention to, and finally the analysis of the current legislative and judicial practice in China, find out the existing problems and put forward some relevant suggestions.
After putting forward the questions at the beginning of the article, this paper first analyzes the general principle of the system of personality denial applicable to parent subsidiary companies. In this part, the reasons for the application of the system of personality denial in the parent and subsidiary company, the legal requirements, the main circumstances, the essence and the results, and the areas in the wholly owned and non wholly funded subsidiaries are discussed. The main reason for the application of personality denial system in parent subsidiary companies is to maintain the principle of fair justice and honesty and credibility, and specifically to protect the interests of creditors and social and public interests. The applicable statutory requirements are: the legal establishment of the subsidiary, the main body and the existence of the parent. There is a causal link between the misuse of the company law personality and the loss of the subsidiary's creditor, and there is no other remedy for the loss of the creditor; that is to say, the application of the system of personality denial in the parent subsidiary company must be strictly prudent, because the system is only a beneficial supplement to the limited liability system, but not a substitute. The behavior of the abuse of legal personality is mainly summed up in the following cases: a significant shortage of corporate capital, the use of corporate personality to evade legal obligations, the use of corporate personality to avoid contractual obligations, and the corporal personality of the company, but not limited to these categories. The result is that the parent company abusing the right of control is linked to its tort liability. Responsibility.
The third part of the article mainly analyzes the particularity of the application of personality denial system in parent subsidiary companies, which are mainly shown in the following four aspects: first, there is a reverse "unveiling the company veil" in the parent subsidiary company, which mainly occurs under the mixed personality of the parent and child company; secondly, there are two even in the parent subsidiary company. Because the parent company's shareholders are protected by the limited liability, the parent company itself is also responsible for the subsidiary. If the subsidiary is to set up sun company again, and so on, it is possible to expose the company's veil to the shareholders of the parent company on many occasions; and again, there is a director manager in the parent company. " The phenomenon of "one servant and two masters" is that the directors often serve in the parent subsidiary company at the same time, but their powers are not divided, so when they abuse the right of control to cause the loss of the creditor of the subsidiary, they should bear the civil liability. But this responsibility needs the law to have a clear regulation, but can not apply the system of denial of personality. Finally, in the tax law, it is broken. In the field of law of production, environment, labor, accounting and auditing, in the field of competition law, parent subsidiary companies are prone to abuse of legal personality. Therefore, personality denial system should also be applied in these fields.
The fourth part of the article mainly analyzes the problem of the application of the personality denial system in the two special types of parent subsidiary companies. In the state controlled parent and subsidiary companies, it should be applied differently. The pure public welfare monopolistic state-owned enterprises should have separate legislation and do not apply the system of personality denial in the company law; and the competitive state-owned holding parent and subsidiary companies are not applicable. It should be applied to the system of personality denial, which should not be excepted. The control of the parent company of the parent company in the multinational parent company is legal, and its appearance itself is because of the existence of control; therefore, the multinational company is more likely to appear the abuse of control in the parent company, thereby damaging the interests of the creditor of the host country. The host country often has a balance of interests, but whether it can apply the system of personality denial is also involved in the state's judicial sovereignty and national interests. It is very complicated to solve this problem. It needs consultation and cooperation between the States. There are still no relevant legal provisions in our country at present.
Finally, according to the analysis and evaluation of the legislative and judicial practice of our country, the problems still exist in the legislation are summarized, mainly the fuzziness and unmaneuverability of the system of personality denial and the lack of the legal provisions of the parent subsidiary companies in our country. At the same time, in view of the defects of the system and the imperfect legislation, the author puts forward some suggestions on the problems that should be paid attention to in the judicial practice.
In a word, the purpose of this article is to analyze and summarize the characteristics of the system of denial of personality in the parent subsidiary company. It is hoped that the application of the system of personality denial in the parent subsidiary company can arouse the attention of the judicial practice and give full play to its due institutional function, so as to protect the interests of the creditor and maintain the social fairness and justice.

【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：D912.29

【相似文献】