论文部分内容阅读
在公司法上,我们对股权的理解往往习惯于将其解释为实体性权利,但股东权利日益呈现出复杂的结构、越来越多地包含着两个层级——实体性权利(狭义股东权)与救济性权利(股东诉权)。实体性权利多直接在公司法中予以安排,而救济性权利则可能在公司法中以相对独立的权利形态出现(例如,股东代表诉讼权),也可能在公司法及其他程序法(民诉法)中隐含地存在。前者我们称为股东的明示诉权,后者称为隐含诉权。民诉法中的隐含诉权兼具公法与私法权利的性质。公司法理论界在讨论股东权利滥用问题时,倾向于将被滥用的股东权利局限于实体性权利,例如,有关法人人格否认案件的讨论,多与股东滥用实体性权利相关。雪莱特公司案表明,股东所拥有的程序性救济权也存在滥用之可能,该案在如何界定股东滥用诉权方面较具典型性和示范性,在认定股东是否构成滥用股东权利的纠纷中,既要看权利人有无滥用权利的行为、主观上是否存在故意或过失,更要重点考察其行使权利的背景、客观方式和结果,通过外化的行为推定其目的从而准确界定权利滥用的维度。
In corporate law, our understanding of equity is often used to interpret it as a substantive right, but the increasingly complex structure of shareholder rights, more and more contains two levels - the substantive rights (narrow sense of ownership ) And relief rights (shareholder rights). Substantive rights are more or less directly arranged in company law, while remedy rights may appear as relatively independent rights in company law (eg, shareholder representative litigation rights) or in company law and other procedural law Act) implicitly exists. The former we call the shareholders’ express right of action, which is called the implied right of action. The Implied Right of Action in Civil Procedure Law Both the Nature of Public Law and Private Law Rights. In discussing the abuse of shareholders ’rights, corporate law theory circle tends to limit the abuse of shareholders’ rights to substantive rights. For example, the discussion on the disregard of legal person’s personality is mostly related to the abuse of substantive rights by shareholders. The case of Snow Wright Company shows that the procedural remedy right possessed by the shareholders also exists the possibility of abuse. The case is more typical and exemplary in how to define the abuse of the right of action by shareholders. In determining whether the shareholder constitutes abuse of shareholder rights, It depends on whether the rights holders abuse or abuses the rights, subjectively whether there is intentionality or negligence, but also focuses on the background, objective ways and results of exercising their rights, and through the externalization of the act to presume their purpose and thus accurately defines the abuse of rights.