本文選題：派生訴訟 + 股東��； 參考：《蘭州大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文

【摘要】： 公司法確立的股東派生訴訟制度,其目的在于當(dāng)公司利益受損卻怠于不能行使訴權(quán)時(shí),給與中小股東一項(xiàng)尋求公力救濟(jì)的程序性權(quán)利,以更好的保護(hù)公司乃至股東的權(quán)益。在股東派生訴訟制度的設(shè)置中,當(dāng)事人法律地位的確定是當(dāng)前立法亟待解決的問(wèn)題。而我國(guó)在該問(wèn)題的許多方面都缺乏明確的法律規(guī)定,給法律實(shí)務(wù)帶來(lái)難題。文章在分析我國(guó)相關(guān)立法現(xiàn)狀的同時(shí),參考國(guó)外理論與實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn),對(duì)構(gòu)建我國(guó)股東派生訴訟制度提出若干修改性意見,以供探討。 文章第一部分介紹了股東派生訴訟制度的概念、特征,分析了該制度的存在價(jià)值與功能,從而在宏觀上對(duì)該制度有了概括的了解。進(jìn)而引出當(dāng)今各國(guó)派生訴訟制度當(dāng)事人訴權(quán)的理論,對(duì)債權(quán)人代位權(quán)說(shuō)、受益權(quán)說(shuō)、股東權(quán)說(shuō)理論之利弊進(jìn)行了分析,論證了派生訴訟中當(dāng)事人訴權(quán)的合理性。 文章第二部分就派生訴訟的原告資格展開論述,在對(duì)各國(guó)原告股東資格適格條件進(jìn)行比較的基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)我國(guó)原告股東資格條件進(jìn)行了論述。同時(shí)試圖在鼓勵(lì)派生訴訟的提起與防止惡意濫訴訟之間尋找一個(gè)合適的平衡點(diǎn),因而又論述了原告濫用訴權(quán)的表現(xiàn)欲防止措施。文章認(rèn)為我國(guó)應(yīng)借鑒美國(guó)的“當(dāng)時(shí)所有權(quán)原則”與“凈手原則”,明確規(guī)定原告在訴訟中的權(quán)利與責(zé)任,提出對(duì)我國(guó)派生訴訟中原告當(dāng)事人法律地位的完善建議。 文章第三部分論述了派生訴訟中被告當(dāng)事人的法律地位。在關(guān)于被告范圍的界定問(wèn)題上,各國(guó)均有不同的規(guī)定,尤其是“他人”的范圍如何界定存在爭(zhēng)議。域外對(duì)此問(wèn)題的立場(chǎng),有以美國(guó)為代表的自由式和以德、日為代表的限制式兩種立法。我國(guó)法律中將“他人”規(guī)定為“侵害公司利益”的主體顯得過(guò)于寬泛,給公司正常經(jīng)營(yíng)模式帶來(lái)隱患,同時(shí)存在對(duì)訴訟資源浪費(fèi)的可能。派生訴訟被告范圍應(yīng)包括董事、監(jiān)事、高級(jí)管理人員�！八恕钡姆秶鷳�(yīng)界定為發(fā)起人、清算人、控股股東、實(shí)際控制人和與公司經(jīng)營(yíng)層利益一致為公司服務(wù)的中介機(jī)構(gòu),而公司外部人如債務(wù)人、侵犯公司利益的行政機(jī)關(guān)等則不包括在內(nèi)。 各國(guó)關(guān)于公司在派生訴訟中的法律地位,規(guī)定各有不同。文章第四部分論述了公司參與派生訴訟的必要性,并以美國(guó)、日本、韓國(guó)為例,深入分析了公司在派生訴訟中的地位。同時(shí)比較了我國(guó)當(dāng)前對(duì)此問(wèn)題的各方觀點(diǎn)之利弊,提出我國(guó)法律在對(duì)公司參訴地位進(jìn)行設(shè)計(jì)時(shí),應(yīng)借鑒日本的輔助參加人制度,同時(shí)對(duì)我國(guó)民事訴訟法中無(wú)獨(dú)立請(qǐng)求權(quán)第三人制度進(jìn)行修改,以設(shè)計(jì)出更為適合我國(guó)國(guó)情的公司法律地位制度。 文章第五部分以美國(guó)、日本為例,簡(jiǎn)要論述了其他股東在派生訴訟中的法律地位,提出我國(guó)派生訴訟中其他股東法律地位的構(gòu)想,對(duì)其他股東的參訴方式、參訴程序及訴訟權(quán)利進(jìn)行了闡述。
[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.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.91

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 陳曉輝;股東派生訴訟原告資格制度研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2011年

2 桑林;股東代表訴訟制度[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2011年

3 吳心瑤;股東派生訴訟之當(dāng)事人制度研究[D];揚(yáng)州大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1886630