【作者】 刘冬京；

【导师】 赵钢；

【作者基本信息】 武汉大学 ， 民商法， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 股东派生诉讼制度(Shareholder’s Derivative Action)是世界各主要市场经济国家公司立法所规定的一项重要制度。它在规范大股东和董事、高级管理人员等的行为、维护中小股东权益方面有着特殊的作用。股东派生诉讼制度最早起源于19世纪中叶的英国,是由英国人在衡平法院所首创,后来被英美法系和大陆法系其他国家陆续借鉴,其是对保护公司利益和间接保护股东利益具有重要作用的一种诉讼制度。我国随着公司制度的不断发展,在2005年10月修订了现行公司法,确立了股东派生诉讼制度①。股东派生诉讼制度在我国的确立,无疑具有重要的里程碑意义。但是,我国的股东派生诉讼制度存在着诸多缺陷和不足之处,例如,立法准备时间短、立法内容粗陋,司法实践经验不够丰富,学界对股东派生诉讼制度的研究亦不深入。正因为受我国股东派生诉讼制度现状之制约,法院在审理股东派生诉讼案件时也就面临着诸多程序制度上的新问题和疑难问题。针对法院审理中面临的这些问题目前国内尚无统一适用的立法或司法解释,因此,完善我国的股东派生诉讼制度便显得尤为迫切和重要。要完善股东派生诉讼制度,最需解决的核心问题乃是股东派生诉讼如何在各种相互冲突的因素中寻求均衡。公司治理的自治性和司法干预的有限性决定了股东派生诉讼与普通民事诉讼的明显差异。这些差异不仅体现在诉讼的基本制度方面,还体现在具体的程序运行上。因此,只有构建一套适合股东派生诉讼案件审理的制度和程序,才能最大程度地实现股东派生诉讼制度的应有功能。故本文以股东派生诉讼的基本制度与相关程序的完善为视角,以比较②等研究方法全面、深入地探讨了股东派生诉讼制度在立法层面、司法实践以及公司治理实务中所面临的诸多问题,意欲以此为立法或司法实践提供理论上的指导及具体操作规程上的雏形。本文共八章,具体内容如下：第一章是股东派生诉讼中当事人制度的若干基本问题。首先,从诉权理论出发,探究了股东提起派生诉讼的实体法基础和程序法依据,即股东权和诉的利益。其次,详细分析和论证了原告股东提起派生诉讼应具备的股东资格条件,股东派生诉讼中被告的确定、被告可被追究责任的行为以及公司、其他股东在诉讼中的地位。最后,对原告股东、公司以及其他股东在派生诉讼中特殊的诉讼权利和义务作了分析和探讨。第二章是股东派生诉讼中的管辖制度和审判组织。首先,对域外股东派生诉讼的管辖制度、我国学界关于股东派生诉讼管辖的观点以及司法实践中股东派生诉讼管辖的相关作法进行了介绍和梳理,进而论述了确立我国股东派生诉讼管辖制度的应然原则,并提出了我国股东派生诉讼应由公司所在地的中级以上人民法院管辖的主张。其次,对股东派生诉讼的审判组织问题进行了探究,同时建议对股东派生诉讼案件应组成合议庭且可采专家陪审制对之进行审理并作出裁判。第三章是股东派生诉讼中的证明制度。首先,对股东派生诉讼的证明对象进行了分类,即包括实体法事实和程序法事实。其次,对股东派生诉讼中的证明责任的分配进行了分析。由于用以证明董事、高管人员等侵犯公司利益的诉讼资料一般由公司和被告掌控,故建议股东派生诉讼证明责任的分配应充分考虑原告股东较弱的举证能力,在对相关事实的证明上采取责任倒置原则。第四章是股东派生诉讼中的诉讼费用制度。首先,对股东派生诉讼中诉讼费用的征收标准和依据进行了比较分析,提出股东派生诉讼案件虽为财产性案件,但由于原告股东支付诉讼费用的经济能力有限,故建议将股东派生诉讼视为非财产性案件征收诉讼费用。其次,对股东派生诉讼中的诉讼费用担保制度进行了探讨,基于我国股东派生诉讼之现况,建议我国可暂不引进诉讼费用担保制度,以促进股东派生诉讼的适用。最后,介绍了域外股东派生诉讼的费用补偿制度,建议我国亦应引进这一制度,以补偿原告股东代位公司提起派生诉讼所支付的费用。第五章是股东派生诉讼的提起与驳回。首先,本章在借鉴域外相关作法的基础上,对我国股东派生诉讼提起的要件、障碍进行了具体论证和分析；指出了我国股东派生诉讼前置程序的不足,并提出了相应的完善建议。其次,对我国股东派生诉讼的驳回问题进行了分析,具体包括对驳回股东派生诉讼的情形、请求驳回派生诉讼的程序及司法审查标准等,同时提出了相关建议。第六章是股东派生诉讼第一审程序中若干特殊情形的处理。首先,对股东派生诉讼中诉的合并的特殊情形进行了分析、论证,认为原告股东可以在诉讼中增加诉讼请求,但其请求须具备派生诉讼之性质；在股东派生诉讼中,被告不能提起反诉。其次,对股东派生诉讼中的撤诉、和解制度以及诉讼中止的特殊情形进行了分析,认为原告股东撤诉需经司法审查,公司不能提出撤诉请求；股东派生诉讼中的和解亦要经过司法审查,并需经过一定的程序,按一定的司法审查标准来进行。最后,分析并明确了股东派生诉讼中诉讼时效认定的若干问题,包括诉讼时效的判断、期间、起算、中止与中断等。第七章是股东派生诉讼中生效判决的既判力。由于股东派生诉讼生效判决的特殊性,因此,本章探讨了股东派生诉讼中生效判决的既判力范围,包括其客观范围、主观范围和时间范围。第八章是股东派生诉讼案件的再审问题。本章介绍了域外派生诉讼的再审之诉制度,进而对构建我国股东派生诉讼的再审程序所涉之若干问题进行了分析,具体包括再审程序的启动主体、再审事由、管辖法院、提起再审的时间、正当当事人等问题。最后,根据我国股东派生诉讼的立法和司法现状,本文在结语部分草拟了“我国人民法院审理股东派生诉讼案件若干问题的规定(建议稿)”,以期能对我国股东派生诉讼的立法和司法解释的出台与完善提供参考意见。更多还原

【Abstract】 Shareholder’s derivative action system is an important system of company legislations in the world’s major market economy countries. It has a special role in standardizing its major shareholders and directors, senior management and other actions and defending the interests of small shareholders. Shareholder’s derivative litigation system is originated in the mid-19th century of England, which is birthed on the court of equity of the British and to be learned by other countries of the Anglo-American law and civil law systems and which is an important litigation system in protecting corporate interests and indirect to protect the interests of shareholders. With the development of the corporate system, China amended the existing Companies Act in October 2005 and established the shareholder derivative litigation system, which have an undoubtedly and milestone Significance. However, China’s system of shareholder derivative lawsuit which are many flaws and deficiencies, such as legislative time is short, legislative is crude, judicial experience is not rich, the academic study on shareholder derivative litigation is not deep. Because of the constraints of our shareholder derivative lawsuit status, the courts are faced with a number of new and difficult procedural and institutional issues. For the court facing many problems, there is no uniform application of domestic legislation or judicial interpretations and therefore improve our shareholder derivative lawsuit system will become more necessary and important.To improve shareholder’s derivative litigation system, one of the core issues to be resolved is how the shareholder’s derivative litigation in a variety of conflicting factors to seek balance. The autonomy of corporate governance and the limitation of judicial intervention decided the significant difference between the shareholder derivative litigation and general civil litigation. The difference is reflected not only in the basic system of litigation, but also reflected in the specific programs to run on. So, only constructing a good shareholder’s derivative litigation system does achieve its functions and purpose. In this paper, on the perspective of the shareholder derivative lawsuit basic systems and procedures improvement, that explored many problems on the shareholder derivative lawsuit system in the legislative, judicial and social practice in order to desire for legislative or judicial practice to provide theoretical guidance and the shape of specific rules. The paper has eight chapters, as follows:The first chapter has a deep study on some basic questions of the shareholder derivative action system. First of all, based on the theory of the right of suit, explored the substantive law and procedural law basis on the shareholder derivative lawsuit. Secondly, a detailed analysis of which the plaintiffs filed shareholder derivative lawsuit should have the qualifications of shareholders, the defendant determination and the accounted acts in the shareholder derivative lawsuit as well as the company, other shareholders’status in the proceedings. Finally, analyzed and discussed the special rights and obligations of the plaintiff shareholders, the company and other shareholders in derivative litigation proceedings. ChapterⅡstudies on the jurisdiction and trial organizations of the shareholder derivative litigation. Firstly,the article introduced the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the shareholder derivative litigation and China’s academic perspective on the jurisdiction of the shareholder derivative action, as well as the jurisdiction of the judicial practices of the shareholder derivative action,discussed the principles of jurisdiction, then came to the conclusion that Intermediate People’s Court have the shareholder derivative litigation jurisdiction.Secondly, researched the trial organizations of the shareholder derivative litigation and recommended that shareholders derivative litigation should be composed of experts in the Full Court and take the jury system to hearing and refree.Chapter III studies the proof system of the shareholder derivative litigation.First of all, classified the proof objects about the shareholders derivative litigation, including the fact that the substantive law and procedural law facts. Secondly, analyzed the burden of proof on the shareholder derivative litigation; because the information to prove violations of company directors and other executives’interest litigation is generally controlled by the company and the defendant, it is suggested that the burden of proof should give full consideration to the allocation of the plaintiff shareholders weak to testify on the relevant facts in the proof of principle to take responsibility for the inverted.Chapter IV researches the shareholder derivative litigation costs and the related system. Firstly, based on a comparative analysis legal costs of collection standards of the shareholder derivative lawsuits and although for the case of property, but because of the plaintiff shareholders to pay legal costs of limited means, it is proposed to the shareholders as a non- property cases. Secondly, the shareholder derivative litigation costs of a security system was discussed, based on the current state of our derivative litigation, suggest not introduce the cost of litigation system in order to promote the application of the shareholder derivative lawsuit. Finally, introduce the extra cost of the shareholder derivative litigation compensation system, China should also introduce the proposed shareholder derivative litigation costs compensation system, compensate the plaintiff-shareholder derivative lawsuit costs for filing the suit on behalf of the company.Chapter V analysis and researches the shareholder derivative lawsuits were filed and dismissed. First of all, learn the related extra-territorial approach on the basis of our shareholder derivative lawsuit against the elements and concrete barriers and so on; point out our pre-procedural shortcomings and make corresponding proposals to improve the shareholder derivative suit. Secondly, analysis and build our shareholders derivative lawsuit was dismissed, including the cases will be dismissed in the shareholder derivative lawsuit, procedures of rejecting the request of the derivative litigation and standards for judicial.Chapter VI studies that the special circumstances against first proceedings of the shareholder derivative lawsuit. First of all, analyzed the special circumstances of merger in the shareholder derivative lawsuit, proof that the plaintiff in shareholder lawsuits may increase its claims, but the request must have the nature of the derivative lawsuit and the defendant can not be filed counterclaims. Secondly, analyzed the drop and the settlement system, as well as the suspension of the proceedings in the shareholder derivative lawsuit; the plaintiff shareholders to be withdrawn, subject to judicial review, the company can not drop the request. The shareholder derivative lawsuit settlement needs to go through the judicial review and subject to certain procedures and according to certain standards of judicial review. Finally, clarified and cleared the shareholder derivative lawsuit in the identification of limitations, including limitation of the judge, time, the starting, with the suspension of interruption, and so on.Chapter VII studies the res judicata of the shareholder derivative lawsuits. This chapter discusses the shareholder derivative litigation judgment’s res judicata scope, defined the scope of its objective and subjective scope and time frame.Chapter VIII discusses and studied the shareholder derivative litigation retrial. This chapter described the extraterritorial retrial of derivative litigation system, and analyzed and built some issues involved China’s shareholder derivative litigation retrial procedure, including the launch of the main retrial procedure, retrial reason, a court of jurisdiction, the retrial time, just as parties and so on.Finally, according to the legislative and judicial status of China’s shareholder derivative litigation, the part of this article concluded the drafting of China’s People’s Court shareholder derivative litigation cases the provisions of a number of issues, with a view of our shareholders derivative litigation legislation and judicial interpretation of the proposed introduction of reference.更多还原