股权冻结条件下股东除名决议的效力及其利益平衡
|
摘要
在我国,股东除名制度是对有限责任公司未出资或者抽逃全部出资的股东采取的强制其退出公司的惩罚性措施,也是法律赋予有限责任公司用以督促股东按时足额缴纳出资的手段。随着股权执行案件的增多,法院对公司股权采取冻结措施后,公司对被冻结股权的股东予以除名或者宣布股东失权的决议是否有效的问题日益突出。对股权冻结情况下公司对股东除名或者宣布失权的原因是多样化的,应坚持私法自治原则,司法谨慎介入公司营运空间,在没有证据能够证明存在欺诈情形下,公司股东会通过决议解除股权被冻结的股东资格的决议应为有效。适用股东除名制度有利于平衡公司及其股东与被除名股东及其债权人利益。
In China, the shareholder expulsion system is a punishment measure to force a shareholder of a limited liability company who has not paid capital contribution or has withdrawn all capital contribution to leave the company, and also a means endowed by the law with the limited liability company to urge shareholders to pay their capital contribution in full and on time. With the increase of equity enforcement cases,there is an increasingly prominent issue over the effectiveness of a company resolution on expelling a shareholder or declaring right termination of a shareholder whose share ownership is frozen after the freezing measures taken by the court on the company's equity. The reasons why a company expels a shareholder or declares right termination in the situation of frozen share ownership are diverse, so the principle of autonomy of private law shall be adhered to, the judicial organ shall be prudent and not interfere in company business space as far as possible, and the resolution adopted by the shareholders' meeting on disqualifying a shareholder with frozen share ownership should be effective. The application of the shareholder expulsion system is conducive to balancing the interests among the company, its shareholders, the expelled shareholder and the creditors of the company.
In China, the shareholder expulsion system is a punishment measure to force a shareholder of a limited liability company who has not paid capital contribution or has withdrawn all capital contribution to leave the company, and also a means endowed by the law with the limited liability company to urge shareholders to pay their capital contribution in full and on time. With the increase of equity enforcement cases,there is an increasingly prominent issue over the effectiveness of a company resolution on expelling a shareholder or declaring right termination of a shareholder whose share ownership is frozen after the freezing measures taken by the court on the company's equity. The reasons why a company expels a shareholder or declares right termination in the situation of frozen share ownership are diverse, so the principle of autonomy of private law shall be adhered to, the judicial organ shall be prudent and not interfere in company business space as far as possible, and the resolution adopted by the shareholders' meeting on disqualifying a shareholder with frozen share ownership should be effective. The application of the shareholder expulsion system is conducive to balancing the interests among the company, its shareholders, the expelled shareholder and the creditors of the company.
引文
(1)参见永州市中级人民法院(2017)湘11执复94号复议决定书。
(2)施天涛:《公司法论》(第三版),法律出版社2014年版,第271页。
(3)刘炳荣:《论有限责任公司股东除名》,载厦门大学法学院:《厦门大学法律评论》(2004年第8辑),厦门大学出版社2004年版,第245页。
(4)参见蒋华胜:《有限责任公司股权转让法律制度研究》,《政治与法律》2017年第10期。
(5)参见李建红、赵栋:《股东失权的制度价值及其对中国的借鉴意义》,《政治与法律》2011年第12期。
(6)参见奚晓明:《最高人民法院关于公司法解释(三)、清算纪要理解与适用》,人民法院出版社2014年版,第56页。
(7)参见凤建军:《公司股东的“除名”与“失权”:从概念到规范》,《法律科学》2013年第2期。
(8)参见曹建波、任秀芳:《我国股东失权制度研究》,《浙江万里学院学报》2008年第4期。
(9)王保树:《从法条的公司法到实践的公司法》,《法学研究》2006年第6期。
(10)参见黄辉:《现代公司法比较研究》,清华大学出版社2011年版,第75页。
(11)参见王保树:《实践中的公司法》,社会科学文献出版社2008年版,第326页。
(2)施天涛:《公司法论》(第三版),法律出版社2014年版,第271页。
(3)刘炳荣:《论有限责任公司股东除名》,载厦门大学法学院:《厦门大学法律评论》(2004年第8辑),厦门大学出版社2004年版,第245页。
(4)参见蒋华胜:《有限责任公司股权转让法律制度研究》,《政治与法律》2017年第10期。
(5)参见李建红、赵栋:《股东失权的制度价值及其对中国的借鉴意义》,《政治与法律》2011年第12期。
(6)参见奚晓明:《最高人民法院关于公司法解释(三)、清算纪要理解与适用》,人民法院出版社2014年版,第56页。
(7)参见凤建军:《公司股东的“除名”与“失权”:从概念到规范》,《法律科学》2013年第2期。
(8)参见曹建波、任秀芳:《我国股东失权制度研究》,《浙江万里学院学报》2008年第4期。
(9)王保树:《从法条的公司法到实践的公司法》,《法学研究》2006年第6期。
(10)参见黄辉:《现代公司法比较研究》,清华大学出版社2011年版,第75页。
(11)参见王保树:《实践中的公司法》,社会科学文献出版社2008年版,第326页。