公司實際出資人法律地位疑難問題研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-11-24 11:45
【摘要】：從改革開放到現(xiàn)在,隨著我國市場經(jīng)濟體制的不斷完善,大量的臺資、外資被引進,而與之產(chǎn)生的隱名投資現(xiàn)象也大量涌現(xiàn)。特別體現(xiàn)在對有限責任公司的投資中,其中實際出資人姓名并不顯示在股東名冊和公司章程等文件上,而顯示在這些外部文件上的人為名義股東。雖然現(xiàn)行立法對解決實際出資人的相關(guān)問題提供了思路,但該立法卻陷入具體問題具體分析的永無止境的價值抉擇中。對于實際出資人這一投資主體的法律地位,仍然持模糊態(tài)度,使得實際出資人、名義股東、公司及公司其他股東、公司外第三人之間的糾紛難以解決,法院在判案時也會因無明確法律條文參考出現(xiàn)同案異果的情形。因而有必要對與實際出資人法律地位相關(guān)的問題進行研究,并提供解決辦法。 實際出資人法律地位疑難問題表現(xiàn)在兩個方面,一是實際出資人與公司其他股東之間的顯名糾紛,二是實際出資人與名義股東和第三人之間的權(quán)利糾紛。實際出資人與公司其他股東之間的顯名糾紛,其實質(zhì)是實際出資人股東資格確認過程中如何平衡雙方利益的問題。要解決這一問題就需要先從理論上分析實際出資人要求顯名是否具有合理基礎(chǔ),否則在不合理的基礎(chǔ)上討論實際出資人要求顯名這一請求就毫無意義。然后對理論界關(guān)于實際出資人顯名地位認定的各種學說以及相關(guān)立法進行評析,指出理論界和實務(wù)界目前也無法解決這一問題。而通過對英美代理制度的分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)可以借鑒隱名代理制度和被代理人身份不公開的代理制度的規(guī)定解決這一問題。而實際出資人與名義股東權(quán)利糾紛的關(guān)鍵在于認定代持股協(xié)議的性質(zhì),根據(jù)代持股協(xié)議的內(nèi)容以及股權(quán)的實際購買者是誰來認定是否屬于委托代理關(guān)系,防止實際出資人以“借款”為由隨意撤資,影響公司安全和穩(wěn)定。要解決實際出資人與第三人的權(quán)利糾紛的關(guān)鍵在于如何平衡實際出資人與第三人之間的利益,即不能一味的保護第三人的利益而犧牲實際出資人的利益。此時仍然可以借鑒英美代理制度中的不容否認代理制度解決實際出資人與第三人之間的法律關(guān)系。 因而關(guān)于實際出資人法律地位的疑難問題都可以利用英美代理制度予以解決,而且我國合同法已經(jīng)對英美代理制度中的隱名代理制度和被代理人身份不公開的代理制度進行了移植,所以引入英美代理制度解決隱名投資相關(guān)問題具有可行性。
[Abstract]:Since the reform and opening up to the present, with the continuous improvement of China's market economic system, a large number of Taiwanese capital, foreign investment has been introduced, and the phenomenon of anonymous investment has also emerged in large numbers. Especially in the investment of the limited liability company, the name of the actual investor is not shown on the register of shareholders and the articles of association, but on these external documents are the nominal shareholders. Although the current legislation provides the train of thought to solve the related problems of the actual investors, the legislation is caught in the endless value choice of concrete analysis of the specific problems. As to the legal status of the actual investor as the main body of investment, there is still a vague attitude, which makes it difficult to resolve the dispute between the actual investor, the nominal shareholder, the company and other shareholders of the company, and the third party outside the company. The court will judge the case because there is no clear legal provisions to refer to the situation of different results in the same case. Therefore, it is necessary to study and provide solutions to the problems related to the legal status of actual investors. There are two difficult problems in the legal status of the actual investor: one is the dispute between the actual investor and other shareholders of the company, the other is the right dispute between the actual investor and the nominal shareholder and the third party. The essence of the dispute between the actual investors and other shareholders of the company is how to balance the interests of both parties in the process of the shareholders' qualification confirmation. In order to solve this problem, it is necessary to analyze theoretically whether there is a reasonable basis for the actual investor to have a clear name, otherwise, it is meaningless to discuss the request of the actual investor to show the name on the unreasonable basis. Then it analyzes various theories and relevant legislation about the recognition of the prominent status of the actual investors in the theoretical circle, and points out that the theoretical and practical circles can not solve this problem at present. Through the analysis of Anglo-American agency system, it is found that this problem can be solved by the provisions of anonymous agency system and undisclosed agent system. The key to the dispute between the actual investor and the nominal shareholder is to determine the nature of the proxy shareholding agreement, and to determine whether it belongs to the principal-agent relationship according to the content of the proxy shareholding agreement and who the actual purchaser of the equity is. To prevent actual investors from withdrawing their funds arbitrarily on the basis of "borrowing", affecting the safety and stability of the company. The key to solve the right dispute between the actual investor and the third party lies in how to balance the interests between the actual investor and the third party, that is, we cannot blindly protect the interests of the third party and sacrifice the interests of the actual investor. At this time, we can still draw lessons from the non-repudiation agency system in the Anglo-American agency system to solve the legal relationship between the actual investor and the third party. Therefore, the difficult problems concerning the legal status of actual investors can be solved by using the Anglo-American agency system. Moreover, the contract law of our country has transplanted the anonymous agency system and the undisclosed agent system in the Anglo-American agency system, so it is feasible to introduce the Anglo-American agency system to solve the problems related to anonymous investment.
【學位授予單位】：湖南師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D922.291.91
本文編號：2353578
[Abstract]:Since the reform and opening up to the present, with the continuous improvement of China's market economic system, a large number of Taiwanese capital, foreign investment has been introduced, and the phenomenon of anonymous investment has also emerged in large numbers. Especially in the investment of the limited liability company, the name of the actual investor is not shown on the register of shareholders and the articles of association, but on these external documents are the nominal shareholders. Although the current legislation provides the train of thought to solve the related problems of the actual investors, the legislation is caught in the endless value choice of concrete analysis of the specific problems. As to the legal status of the actual investor as the main body of investment, there is still a vague attitude, which makes it difficult to resolve the dispute between the actual investor, the nominal shareholder, the company and other shareholders of the company, and the third party outside the company. The court will judge the case because there is no clear legal provisions to refer to the situation of different results in the same case. Therefore, it is necessary to study and provide solutions to the problems related to the legal status of actual investors. There are two difficult problems in the legal status of the actual investor: one is the dispute between the actual investor and other shareholders of the company, the other is the right dispute between the actual investor and the nominal shareholder and the third party. The essence of the dispute between the actual investors and other shareholders of the company is how to balance the interests of both parties in the process of the shareholders' qualification confirmation. In order to solve this problem, it is necessary to analyze theoretically whether there is a reasonable basis for the actual investor to have a clear name, otherwise, it is meaningless to discuss the request of the actual investor to show the name on the unreasonable basis. Then it analyzes various theories and relevant legislation about the recognition of the prominent status of the actual investors in the theoretical circle, and points out that the theoretical and practical circles can not solve this problem at present. Through the analysis of Anglo-American agency system, it is found that this problem can be solved by the provisions of anonymous agency system and undisclosed agent system. The key to the dispute between the actual investor and the nominal shareholder is to determine the nature of the proxy shareholding agreement, and to determine whether it belongs to the principal-agent relationship according to the content of the proxy shareholding agreement and who the actual purchaser of the equity is. To prevent actual investors from withdrawing their funds arbitrarily on the basis of "borrowing", affecting the safety and stability of the company. The key to solve the right dispute between the actual investor and the third party lies in how to balance the interests between the actual investor and the third party, that is, we cannot blindly protect the interests of the third party and sacrifice the interests of the actual investor. At this time, we can still draw lessons from the non-repudiation agency system in the Anglo-American agency system to solve the legal relationship between the actual investor and the third party. Therefore, the difficult problems concerning the legal status of actual investors can be solved by using the Anglo-American agency system. Moreover, the contract law of our country has transplanted the anonymous agency system and the undisclosed agent system in the Anglo-American agency system, so it is feasible to introduce the Anglo-American agency system to solve the problems related to anonymous investment.
【學位授予單位】：湖南師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D922.291.91
【參考文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條
1 魏曉楠;;公司中隱名投資的法律問題[J];當代經(jīng)理人;2005年05期
2 崔文星;;論民事權(quán)利與權(quán)力、義務(wù)、責任的邏輯關(guān)系[J];大連海事大學學報(社會科學版);2009年06期
3 虞政平;股東資格的法律確認[J];法律適用;2003年08期
4 石育斌;毛燕瓊;;如何認定臺商在大陸隱名投資的法律效力——以上海為例的探討[J];華東師范大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2006年01期
5 徐海燕;論我國代理制度的完善[J];長江大學學報(社會科學版);2005年02期
6 陳思亮;;隱名出資的法律問題[J];信陽農(nóng)業(yè)高等專科學校學報;2009年04期
相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前2條
1 劉敏;[N];人民法院報;2003年
2 張能寶;[N];人民法院報;2006年
相關(guān)博士學位論文 前1條
1 李曉霖;論股東資格確認[D];吉林大學;2008年
相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前6條
1 高建峰;有限責任公司隱名股東法律地位研究[D];中國政法大學;2011年
2 應(yīng)朝陽;試析有限責任公司隱名股東的權(quán)利和義務(wù)[D];復(fù)旦大學;2008年
3 王憲禮;試論隱名出資人的法律地位及相關(guān)糾紛處理機制[D];中國政法大學;2009年
4 顧東偉;隱名股東法律地位研究[D];中國政法大學;2009年
5 羅莎;隱名股東股東資格認定法律問題研究[D];西南政法大學;2010年
6 李衛(wèi);有限責任公司隱名股東法律問題研究[D];復(fù)旦大學;2010年
，本文編號：2353578
本文鏈接：http://www.sikaile.net/falvlunwen/hetongqiyue/2353578.html
