本文選題：股東　切入點：利潤分配請求權　出處：《海南大學》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：在2016年4月12日,最高人民法院頒布了《關于適用中華人民共和國公司法若干問題的規(guī)定(四)(征求意見稿)》。這里面的第十九條到第二十一條主要是對利潤分配的請求權做出詳細的規(guī)定。這也是首次在公司法中針對利潤分配進行詳細闡述。通過查詢北大法意數(shù)據(jù)庫、參考各級法院的指導性判例、經(jīng)典案例、閱讀最高人民法院公報等,針對整合公司利潤分配為案由的案例發(fā)現(xiàn)問題,以比較法的視角對比國內外法律規(guī)定及司法實踐,通過分析法律提供的救濟方式、行使權利障礙和成因,本文分五章對股東利潤分配請求權進行研究:通過兩個案例提出問題,通過案件梳理所反映出的司法實踐情況展示了法院的觀點和傾向,提出目前司法實踐中處理的困惑;然后對股東利潤分配請求權的定義和基本性質進行了廣義上的解釋,列舉相關法律規(guī)定,辨析利潤分配請求權的法律性質——既不是期待權也不是請求權,而是一種新型權利;接著以比較法的視角對比展示了美國法、英國法、法國法、德國法的相關立法規(guī)定,目的在于通過國外立法對我國立法進行啟示,一定要創(chuàng)建清晰的具有一定操作性的裁判準則與標準,涉及強制分配股利之訴。以下是本篇論文的亮點和重點,首先主要指出我國公司股東利潤分配請求權存在的問題,包括司法介入準則尚未確立、現(xiàn)行股東利潤分配制度立法救濟不足、司法干預界限模糊、公司盈余分配數(shù)額難以確定四個大方面,這也是導致我國大量股東利潤分配糾紛的原因。最后論述解決途徑即我國公司股東利潤分配請求權的完善措施,包括確立司法介入(司法介入公司盈余糾紛的正當性和合理性)、立法完善、司法干預應具有前提及建立司法干預的合理邊界、司法實踐中確定公司盈余分配數(shù)額。
[Abstract]:In April 12, 2016, the Supreme People's Court promulgated the "provisions on some issues concerning the application of company law of People's Republic of China (four) (Draft). The inside of the nineteenth to twenty-first is the main claim of the distribution of profits to make detailed provisions. This is the first time in the company law for profit distribution in detail. Through query Peking University Law Database, case guidance, all levels of court reference classic case, read the bulletin of the Supreme People's court, according to the company's profit distribution for the integration of the case found the problem, by comparing domestic and foreign law perspective than a law and judicial practice, through the analysis of law remedies, the exercise of the rights and the causes of the disorder. Five chapter is the research of the right to request the allocation of profits for shareholders: ask questions through two cases, the judicial practice by combing the case reflected To demonstrate the opinion of the court and the tendency, put forward the current judicial practice in the treatment of confusion; then the definition of the right to request the allocation of profits and the basic properties of the generalized interpretation, lists the relevant provisions of the law, the legal nature of the claim of the profit distribution is neither right nor to claim, but a new right; then in the perspective of comparison of comparative law shows the American law, British law, French law, German law legislation, the purpose of this revelation to the legislation through the foreign legislation, we must judge criteria and standards to create clear practical, involving the dividend distribution litigation. The following are highlights and the focus of this thesis, firstly pointed out that China's shareholders profit distribution claim problems, including judicial intervention criteria has not been established, the current stock profits distribution system The legislative remedy, judicial intervention is obscure and difficult to determine the amount of earnings distribution in four aspects, which is the cause of China's large shareholders profit distribution disputes. Finally discusses the way that our shareholders profit distribution claim measures, including the establishment of judicial intervention of judicial intervention in corporate earnings (the legitimacy and disputes the rationality of legislation, judicial intervention), should be reasonable boundary with the premise and the establishment of judicial intervention, determine the company's distribution of surplus amount in judicial practice.

【學位授予單位】：海南大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前1條

1 劉云霞;;股東利潤分配請求權的定性和司法救濟[J];中國商界(下半月);2009年01期

相關重要報紙文章 前5條

1 秦曉飛 錢培清 張達軍;法院判決公司分配股東利潤[N];法制日報;2006年

2 記者 黃群;青鳥華光突遭立案調查 信披違規(guī)或涉大股東利潤輸送[N];上海證券報;2013年

3 記者 朱賢佳;聚焦四大領域 復星將積極參與國企改制[N];上海證券報;2014年

4 肖巍;關注企業(yè)的社會責任問題[N];文匯報;2006年

5 楊思卓;企業(yè)需要“精”營[N];首都建設報;2011年

相關碩士學位論文 前3條

1 鄧可人;論中小股東利潤分配請求權的司法救濟[D];中國政法大學;2016年

2 曹穎芳;公司股東利潤分配請求權問題研究[D];海南大學;2017年

3 張瑞學;有限責任公司股東利潤分配請求權的司法救濟[D];西南政法大學;2011年

，

本文編號：1710011