發(fā)布時間：2018-03-29 10:01

  本文選題：有限責任公司　切入點：股東　出處：《貴州大學》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文通過2013年北京市一中院二審審結的“上訴人劉某某與被上訴人北京市新路運輸有限公司請求公司收購股份糾紛一案”的判決說明了當前研究有限責任公司股東退股權仍具有現(xiàn)實意義,從而引出論題《有限責任公司股東退股權法律問題研究》。本文除引言和結語外,共分為四個部分。第一部分,筆者首先通過對國內外關于退股權含義的觀點進行總結,提出了自己對于退股權的定義。之后將退股權與相近概念進行比較,使退股權含義更加明晰。之后,對有限責任公司股東退股權的理論基礎進行了敘述。第一部分為全文的理論基礎。第二部分,通過對大陸法系國家代表德國有限公司股東退股權和英美法系國家代表美國封閉公司的股東退股權在主體、適用條件、程序等方面的總結、對比,得出德國在退股權的權利主體和適用條件上規(guī)定的比較完善,而美國在退股權的行使程序和估價規(guī)則上規(guī)定的比較詳備。進而可知,我國的有限公司股東退股權可在實體規(guī)則方面借鑒德國規(guī)定,在程序方面借鑒美國規(guī)定。第三部分,筆者通過對我國現(xiàn)行有限責任公司股東退股權制度進行總結,詳細的指出了我國現(xiàn)行制度存在制度不成體系、權利主體范圍過窄、適用范圍過于局限等不足,從而使第四部分提出完善建議有了相對性。第四部分,針對我國有限責任公司股東退股權制度存在的不足,在借鑒德美兩國相關制度的基礎上,筆者從基本原則、實體規(guī)則、程序規(guī)則三方面對我國有限責任公司股東退股權制度提出了詳盡的完善建議,這部分也是本文的重中之重和亮點部分。結語部分,筆者對全文進行了梳理、總結,重申了本文的觀點。
[Abstract]:Through the judgment of "appellant Liu Xi-mou and appellee Beijing New Road Transportation Co., Ltd., requesting the company to buy shares", which was concluded in the second instance of the first Middle Court of Beijing in 2013, this article explains the current research limited liability company stock. Eastward withdrawal of equity is still of practical significance. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into four parts. The first part, the author summarizes the domestic and foreign views on the meaning of withdrawal. The author puts forward his own definition of withdrawing equity, and compares the withdrawal of equity with similar concepts to make the meaning of withdrawal more clear. This paper describes the theoretical basis of shareholders' withdrawal of equity in a limited liability company. The first part is the theoretical basis of the full text. The second part, Through the summary of the withdrawal of shareholders' equity in the continental law countries on behalf of the German limited company and the withdrawal of the shareholders of the Anglo-American law system countries on behalf of the closed companies in the United States in the aspects of subject, applicable conditions, procedures, and so on, a comparison is made. The conclusion is that Germany has perfect provisions on the subject of the right and the applicable conditions, while the United States has more detailed provisions on the procedure for the exercise of the withdrawal of shares and the rules of valuation. In the third part, the author summarizes the current shareholder withdrawal system of limited liability company in our country, which can be used for reference in the substantive rules of Germany and the United States in the aspect of procedure. It points out in detail that the current system of our country is not systematic, the scope of the subject of right is too narrow, the scope of application is too limited, and so on. In view of the deficiency of shareholder withdrawal system of limited liability company in our country, on the basis of drawing lessons from the relevant systems of Germany and the United States, the author from the basic principles, substantive rules, Three aspects of the procedural rules of China's limited liability company shareholders to withdraw equity system made detailed suggestions, this part is also the most important and highlight part of this article. Conclusion part, the author of the full text is combed, summarized, The point of view of this paper is reiterated.
【學位授予單位】：貴州大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 王麗麗;;論股東退股權[J];科學之友(B版);2008年04期

2 李昆吾;;淺議有限責任公司股東退股權的立論依據(jù)[J];經(jīng)濟研究導刊;2011年08期

3 崔越;王志生;;有限責任公司股東的退股權及相關制度的構建[J];商場現(xiàn)代化;2006年17期

4 閆可可;;論有限責任公司股東退股權的正當性[J];許昌學院學報;2013年06期

5 張玉玲;;淺議有限公司股東的退股權——對《公司法》第75條的完善[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(下旬);2011年07期

6 董帝鑾;;論有限責任公司股東退股權制度——兼評《公司法》第七十五條[J];重慶三峽學院學報;2011年01期

7 甘培忠;論有限責任公司股東的退股權[J];學術探索;2002年05期

8 孫聚團;淺議有限責任公司股東的退股權[J];法學雜志;2004年06期

9 孔晶明;;對有限公司股東退股權制度的再認識——從公司本質的角度探討[J];經(jīng)濟師;2010年12期

10 江平;現(xiàn)階段企業(yè)的法律環(huán)境[J];建設機械技術與管理;2005年10期

相關會議論文 前3條

1 宋京華;;我國有限責任公司股東退股權的問題研究[A];當代法學論壇（2011年第2輯）[C];2011年

2 張海e，

本文編號：1680634