【作者】 雷金牛；

【导师】 苏号朋；

【作者基本信息】 对外经济贸易大学 ， 民商法学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 从康孟达契约到隐名合伙，再到今天的隐名股东，隐名投资一路走来，引发的法律争议与纠纷不断。对于隐名投资，一直存在或废或立两种不同的立场。不过，肯定也好，否定也罢，无可争辩并不容回避的事实是，隐名投资已经在我国外商投资企业、有限责任公司、股份有限公司、合伙等各类企业组织中均不同程度地广泛存在。近年来，随着我国改革开放与市场经济发展，因隐名投资而引发的各类纠纷亦日益增长，其中以外商投资企业与有限责任公司领域尤为多发。实践中，隐名投资纠纷主要表现为隐名投资合同纠纷、出资瑕疵纠纷、股权确认纠纷、股权转让纠纷、投资权益归属纠纷等。目前，我国公司法、合同法缺乏关于隐名投资的明确规定，仅《关于审理外商投资企业纠纷案件若干问题的规定（一）》（法释[2010]9号）和《关于适用<中华人民共和国公司法>若干问题的规定（三）》（法释[2011]3号）两个司法解释涉及隐名投资问题，前者适用于解决外商投资企业中的隐名投资纠纷，后者则主要适用于解决公司中的隐名投资纠纷。上述两个司法解释的颁布与施行，为司法实务界解决隐名投资纠纷提供了统一的裁判标准，发挥了积极的作用。但是因为两个司法解释并非专门针对隐名投资问题，故而对隐名投资的法律规制缺乏整体性架构与体系化设计，其中关于隐名投资的具体规定难免失之疏漏、简略或考虑不周，甚至存在相互矛盾与冲突的地方。也就是说，从司法实务的角度而言，对隐名投资的法律规制问题进行深入系统化的研究，仍存在客观实际上的需要。从理论上看，隐名投资，特别是有限责任公司领域的隐名投资，不仅与有限责任公司的“人合性”特征相抵触，也与现代商法权利外观主义以及公司登记公示公信原则相冲突，甚至危及公司独立人格、股东有限责任、法人治理结构等公司基本法律制度。如何利用现有法律理论及法律制度，消弭隐名投资对于公司基本法律制度的不利冲击，实现制度协调与理论对接，具有重要的理论价值。对隐名投资进行研究涉及的法律问题主要有：隐名投资的法律性质，隐名投资合同的主要内容与法律效力，隐名投资股东资格的认定，隐名投资人、名义股东与公司、其他股东的法律关系，隐名投资人与名义股东的权责分配机制，隐名投资人在公司法、合同法以及信托法上的权益及相关保障机制，隐名投资出资瑕疵责任的承担，公司人格否认情形下隐名投资人的法律责任，公司债权人等第三人利益的保护，隐名投资人要求显名成为公司股东的身份转化，等等。在以上所有问题中，其中对于隐名投资合同的研究是基础，对于隐名投资法律性质的认识是桥梁与纽带，对于隐名投资股东资格认定的研究则是核心。这是因为，从隐名投资的整个过程来看，隐名投资主要可以分为两个层面的法律关系：第一个层面是隐名投资人与名义股东之间通过订立隐名投资合同所形成的合同法律关系，主要适用合同法调整；第二个层面是隐名投资人通过名义股东向公司出资所形成的投资法律关系，主要适用公司法调整。其中，第二层公司法上的投资法律关系是建立在第一层合同法律关系之上的，故对第一层合同法律关系的性质以及效力的不同处理，会影响到第二层法律关系中相关主体权利义务的分配以及相应法律责任的承担，但与此同时，第二层法律关系又是相对独立的，有其自身的法律特性与规范要求。本文选取有限责任公司中的协议型隐名投资作为研究对象，以关于隐名投资存废的争议为探讨的逻辑起点，分析了隐名投资法律关系性质并阐析了隐名投资合同内容与效力，进而探讨股东资格的认定标准以及不同类型隐名投资情形下股东资格的具体认定，最后以隐名投资出资瑕疵责任制度与刺破隐名投资人双重面纱制度构建以及隐名投资股权信托制度设计为重点，提出系统化构建我国隐名投资法律规制体系的建议。全文共分六章，主要内容如下：第1章“导论”。首先，本章从隐名投资引发的法律争议入手，在对隐名投资合同效力、股东资格认定、公司债权人与其他善意第三人利益保护等核心性争议进行分析的基础上，梳理了我国法律法规关于隐名投资的现有规定，指出了我国现有法律规定对于隐名投资规制的不足，进而阐释了本论文研究的理论与实践意义。其次，在综合梳理国内外有关隐名投资研究文献资料的基础上，对隐名投资研究现状进行了扼要评价，指出已有研究成果主要存在视野不够广阔、整体系统性欠缺、某些专题研究不够精细化、具体规则设计的合理性与可操作性欠佳等不足之处。再次，对本文的研究范畴进行界定，选取有限责任公司中的协议型隐名投资作为研究重点。最后，明确了研究的基本路径，本文选定价值分析法、规范分析法、实证分析法、比较研究法为主要研究方法，确立了从实践问题分析到理论制度探讨再到法律规制完善的基本研究范式。第2章“存废论：隐名投资规制之立论基础”。本章在对隐名投资的历史缘起、主要成因进行全面考察的基础上，通过对隐名投资利弊的客观辩证分析，以及通过对“完全隐名投资与不完全隐名投资”、“协议型隐名投资与非协议型隐名投资”两种主要的隐名投资分类进行类型化研究，认为隐名投资这一社会经济现象有其产生的历史必然性与客观存在的现实需求性，对其存废不能搞要么存要么废的简单一刀切，而应具体问题具体分析，不同情况不同处理。指出，对于那些恶意规避法律，严重损害国家利益、公共利益或者第三人合法利益的隐名投资，要依法予以禁止或取缔，与此同时，还应依法追究相关行为人的民事责任、行政责任乃至刑事责任；对于那些并不损害国家利益、公共利益与第三人合法利益的善意规避类隐名投资或非规避类隐名投资，则要通过法律的完善以及制度创新对其加以引导与规范。本章在最后提出，遵循契约自由之原则以及投资自由、商法自治之精神，通过制度创新以及法律的完善尽快立法确认隐名投资制度，从而将我国社会现实经济生活中的各类隐名投资行为纳入法律规制的轨道，扬隐名投资之利，去隐名投资之弊，有效利用隐名投资这一灵活自由的投融资方式促进我国社会经济的更好发展。第3章“契约论：隐名投资合同之构造”。隐名投资合同在隐名投资法律关系中处于基础性地位，隐名投资合同的法律性质与法律效力，不仅影响到隐名投资人与名义股东的权利与义务，而且涉及到公司、其他股东以及公司债权人等第三人的利益，因此本章在对隐名投资合同的概念进行界定的基础上，重点对隐名投资合同的法律性质、合同内容与法律效力进行了分析与探讨。认为，在我国《合同法》未对隐名投资合同作出明确规定之前，应参照现有典型合同的相关法律规范，并根据隐名投资合同当事人关于投资收益归属、投资风险承担以及股东权利享有与行使的具体约定来对隐名投资合同的法律性质作出类比解释。对于隐名投资合同内容的探讨，重点分析了出资、股权、投资收益与风险、违约责任等主要内容。继而，从合同主体、合同内容、合同形式三个方面探讨了隐名投资合同效力认定的要件，提出了隐名投资合同效力认定的“有效认定优先”与“法益权衡”两项基本原则，并运用这两项基本原则对规避投资身份限制、规避审批手续、规避股东人数限制、规避股权转让限制、不正当获取税费优惠待遇等五类隐名投资合同的效力进行了具体分析。第4章“资格论：隐名投资之股东认定”。股东资格是投资人取得和行使股东权利、实现其投资收益、承担股东义务以及相应责任的基础与前提。在公司法上，股东与公司之间、股东与股东之间以及股东与公司各组织机构之间法律关系的确定，也都源于股东资格的认定。本章从对股东资格的含义探讨入手，全面分析了股东资格“能力”、“条件”、“身份”三个方面的含义，进而阐述了股东资格认定对于投资者本人、公司、公司其他股东、公司债权人以及股权受让人等利害关系人的实际意义。在对股东资格认定的“实质说”、“形式说”与“区别说”三大学说的主要观点进行介绍与评述的基础之上，明确指出股东资格认定的核心要素是公司与投资者之间的“合意”。在对股东资格认定的各类证据进行具体分析以及借鉴相关国家股东资格认定标准的基础上，确立了“股东名册”一元化认定股东资格的“形式例外说”标准，并对该标准的具体内涵及其运用与完善进行了阐明。指出，隐名投资情形下的股东资格认定，应坚持以意思自治的“合意”原则、公示公信的外观主义原则、区别认定的原则为指导，在此基础上，本章进而对协议型隐名投资情形下的行权式隐名投资、非行权式隐名投资以及非协议型隐名投资情形下的冒名投资与虚名投资的股东资格认定做出了具体分析。认为，基于公司与投资者之间的“合意”这一核心要素，依据股东名册一元化认定股东资格的“形式例外说”标准，对于协议型的非行权式隐名投资和间接行权式隐名投资，应认定名义股东具有股东资格；对于协议型的直接行权式隐名投资，应认定隐名投资人对内的实质股东资格与名义股东对外的形式股东资格；对于非协议型的冒名投资与虚名投资，应直接认定隐名投资人具有股东资格。第5章“完善论：隐名投资之法律规制”。首先，本章对我国关于隐名投资的现行法律规定进行了全面梳理，在肯定现有法律规制成效的基础上指出了我国现行法律对于隐名投资规制的漏洞与不足。针对现有法律规制中存在的问题，提出了完善隐名投资法律规制的基本思路与总体原则。指出，隐名投资法律规制的完善，应立足于我国现有法律体系与公司中隐名投资的实际情况，坚持前瞻意识和体系化设计，全面谋划，整体架构，努力完善我国公司法、合同法、信托法以及民法通则等法律法规的相关法律制度并加以综合运用，系统化构建隐名投资的法律规制体系。在此基础上，本章重点对隐名投资出资义务、出资瑕疵责任、刺破隐名投资人双重面纱三项具体制度的构建进行阐明。最后，本章运用信托原理与信托法律规定，对隐名投资股权信托制度进行具体设计，通过对隐名投资人与名义股东的权利义务设计以及股权信托合同公证、股权信托登记等制度的构建与完善，发挥股权信托对公司中的隐名投资进行有效法律规制的应有制度价值。第6章“结论”。本章对本文形成的主要观点以及构建的主要制度进行简单总结，并指出了关于隐名投资法律规制需要继续研究的专题以及研究的方向。更多还原

【Abstract】 From the earlier Commonda Contract, to dormant partnership，up to currentdormant shareholders, dormant investment has triggered numerous legalcontroversies and disputes. There has existed two different opinions about dormantinvestment whether it should be abandoned or recognized. However, it does notmake any difference whether one refutes it or approves it, the indisputable andinescapable fact is that dormant investment has extensively existed to variousdegrees in China’s foreign-invested enterprises, limited liability companies,companies limited by shares and partnerships and various enterprises. In recent years,along with China’s reform and opening to the outside world, various disputes causedby dormant investment have been on the increase, among which, foreign-investedenterprises and limited liability companies are more involved.In legal practice, dormant investment disputes are mainly found in thefollowing circumstances: dormant investment contract, financial contribution faults,confirmation of equity, transfer of equity, and ownership of investment interests, etc.Currently, both China’s Company Law and Contract Law lack clarity in stipulation.Only two judicial interpretations involve dormant investment:“Provisions of theSupreme People’s Court on Various Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases involvingDisputes Relating to Foreign-invested Enterprises (1)”(Judicial Interpretation [2010]No.9) and “Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Certain Issues Concerningthe Application of the ‘Company Law of the People’s Republic of China’(III)”(Judicial Interpretation [2011] No.3). The former is applicable for settling dormantinvestment disputes in foreign-invested enterprises; while the latter, on the otherhand, is mainly suitable for settling dormant investment disputes for companies.The enactment and implementation of the two above-mentioned judicialinterpretations have provided uniform standard and played a positive role in judgingdormant investment disputes in legal practice. However, due to the fact that the twojudicial interpretations do not mean to aim pointedly at the issue of dormantinvestment, therefore they lack overall framework and systematic design in legalsystem towards dormant investment. As for the issue of dormant investment, theregulations display roughness, simplicity and thoughtlessness. There even existsmutual contradiction and conflicts. In other words, from the point of view ofjuridical practice, there is still objective need to carry out systematic research on legal regulations of dormant investment.Theoretically, dormant investment not only conflicts with the collaboration ofshareholders in limited liability companies, but also goes against moderncommercial law representation and the principle of public notice and public trust forcompany registration. It even threatens the company’s basic legal system, such ascompany’s independent personality, shareholder’s limited liability and legal-persongovernance structure. It would be of great importance to make use of the existinglegal theories and institutions to prevent the negative influence of dormantinvestment towards basic corporate legal system and realize the harmoniouscoordination of the legal system.The research into dormant investment involves the following legal issues:legal nature of dormant investment;the main content of a dormant investment contract and its force of law;confirmation of shareholder’s qualification in dormant investment;legal relationship of dormant investor and nominal shareholder vs. companyand other shareholders;distribution mechanism over rights and liabilities between the dormant investorand nominal shareholder;the responsibility for dormant investment capital faults;the legal responsibility of the dormant investor under the circumstances ofdisregard of corporate personality;interest protection for company creditors or any third person, etc.Of all the issues above-mentioned, the research on dormant investmentcontracts may serve as the basis, cognition of the legal nature of dormant investmentmay serve as a bridge, but the key is the research into confirmation of shareholder’squalification in dormant investment. This is because, by looking at the procedure ofdormant investment, there are two layers of legal relations in dormant investment.The first layer is the contract legal relationship between the dormant investor andnominal shareholder through signing the dormant investment contract, which issuitable to be adjusted by Contract Law. The second layer is the legal relationship ofinvestment by the dormant investor’s capital contribution to a company through anominal shareholder, which is suitable to be adjusted by Company Law. Due to thefact that the second layer of investment legal relationship of Company Law is builton the basis of the first layer of contract legal relationship, therefore, the way to dealwith the first layer of contract legal relationship will affect the distribution of rights and liabilities of relevant principals as well as corresponding legal responsibilities.Meanwhile, the second layer of legal relationship is relatively independent, with itsown legal characteristics, regulations and requirements.This paper takes up agreement-type dormant investment in limited liabilitycompanies as its research target, and takes the argument whether the dormantinvestment should exist or be abolished as its logic starting point. Then it analysesthe legal relationship nature of the dormant investment, the content and validity ofthe dormant investment contract, with an effort to discuss the confirmation standardsfor shareholders’ qualification and specific confirmation of shareholder’squalification under different circumstances of dormant investment. Finally byfocusing on the responsibility of dormant investment capital contribution faults,piercing the dual-veil of the dormant investors and the mechanism designing ofequity trust of domant investment, the paper then puts forward propositions tosystematically establishing legal regulatory system for China’s dormant investment.This paper is divided into6chapters with the following as the main contents.Chapter1IntroductionFirst of all, the chapter starts from legal disputes cause by dormant investment.On the basis of analyzing the key disputes concerning the validity of dormantinvestment contracts, confirmation of shareholder qualification, protection of theinterests of corporate creditors and other third party in good faith, it lists China’scurrent legal regulations about dormant investment, analyses the inadequacies inChina’s laws of dormant investment and it goes on to explain the theory studied bythe paper and its contemporary significance.Secondly, having reviewed comprehensively the relevant data and literature ondormant investment research published both in China and abroad, the chapter gives abrief comment on the current status of studies on dormant investment. It points outthat the key problem existed in the research achievement lies in the fact that thescope of research does not appear to be extensive enough, that lacks overallsystematic framework, some specific subject research has not been carried outthoroughly and rationality, and some regulation designing is not wholly practical.Thirdly, the chapter defines the research scope and has chosen agreement-typedormant investment in limited liability company as the key research area.Finally, having identified the basic path of research, the chapter decides on thefollowing as its research methods–value analysis, normative analysis, empirical analysis, comparative study, the chapter finalizes its basic research style frompractical issue analysis to discussion of theoretic system, and then to perfection oflegal rule and regulations.Chapter2Existence or Abolition: Theoretical basis on regulations of dormant investmentThis chapter starts with the background and history of dormant investment.Based on the overall review of the main reasons, through objective dialecticalanalysis of dormant investment and through research on the two main types as“entire dormant investment and partial dormant investment” and “agreement-typedormant investment and non-agreement-type dormant investment”, the chapter holdsthe opinion that dormant investment–the socio-economic phenomenon–hashistoric inevitability and practical social needs. It’s not as simple an issue as let it beor not to be. The issue should be dealt with according to each case. The chapterpoints out that those dormant investments maliciously avoiding being punished bylaw, seriously harming the nation’s interest, public interest or third party legalinterest, must be banned according to law. At the same time, relevant doers should beheld responsible for civil, administrative and criminal responsibilities. Thosedormant investments that do not harm the country’s interest, public interest and thethird party interest should be guided and governed through the perfection of the lawand innovation of regulations.The chapter finally points out that various types of dormant investments in reallife should be guided into legal channels in the spirit of commercial law of freedomof investment by system innovation and perfection of law, and dormant investmentshould be legalized according to the principle of freedom of contract and investment.To advocate the benefits of dormant investment, get rid of negative side of dormantinvestment, effectively make use of dormant investment as a flexible means ofinvestment to boost the economic development of China.Chapter3On Contract: Structure of Dormant Investment ContractDormant investment contract lies as the basis in dormant investment legalrelationship. The legal nature and effectiveness of dormant investment contract donot only affect the rights and liabilities of the dormant investor and nominalshareholder, but they also affect the interest of the company, other shareholders and company creditors, etc. Therefore, on the basis of defining the concept of dormantinvestment contract, the chapter also carries out discussion on the legal nature,content and legal validity of the dormant investment contract.The chapter holds the opinion that since China has not come up with specificregulations with regard to dormant investments, references should be made intorelevant legal rules of the current typical contract. It draws an analogicalinterpretation of the legal nature of dormant investment contract according to thespecific terms with regard to investment profit attribution, sharing of investmentrisks and execution of shareholder’s right. As for the content of dormant investmentcontract, emphasis is placed on analyzing the main contents such as capitalcontribution, equities, investment profits, risks and responsibility of breachingcontract.Then the chapter discusses the key elements of effectiveness of dormantinvestment contract from three aspects: the subject of the contract, the content of thecontract, the format of the contract. It puts forward two basic principles: priority ofeffectiveness, comparison of legal interest. By applying these two principles, thechapter specifically analyzes the validity of5types of dormant investment contracts:evasion of limitation on investment identity, evasion of application formalities,evasion of restriction on the number of shareholders, evasion of restriction on equitytransfer and illegal acquisition of tax preferential treatment.Chapter4On Qualification: Confirmation of Shareholder in Dormant InvestmentShareholder’s qualification is the basis and precondition for the investor to gainand execute shareholder’s rights, materialize their investment profits and shouldershareholder’s obligations and relevant responsibilities. According to Company Law,the legal relationship between the shareholder and company, shareholder andshareholder, shareholder and various sections of the company originates from theconfirmation of shareholder qualification.This chapter, starting with discussion of the meaning of shareholderqualification, comprehensively analyzes the three aspects of shareholderqualification–capacity, condition and identity. And it then explains the practicalsignificance of the shareholder qualification confirmation to the investor him/herself,other shareholders of the company, company creditors and equity assignees, etc. Onthe basis of introducing and commenting on the three major viewpoints–theory of substantive, theory of formalism, theory of distinction. In confirmation ofshareholder qualification, the chapter explicitly points out that the key element inconfirmation of shareholder qualification is the “mutual consensus” between thecompany and the investor.This chapter also sets up the mono-standard of formative exception by registerof shareholders, on the basis of specific analysis of all kinds of evidence ofshareholder qualification and taking reference to the methodology in the relativecountries, followed by exploring its content, operation and perfection. It also pointsout that, in case of dormant investments, the confirmation of a shareholderqualification should be guided by principles of the consensus from free minds of theparties, the externalization of publicity and distinction. Still on this basis, this articlefurther explores the ascertaining of shareholder qualification by a false or bogusname in dormant investments with execution of rights, without execution of rights,or non-agreement type. It holds that the core element of consent between thecorporation and the investors should justify the nominal shareholder its qualificationin agreement-type dormant investments without execution of rights and indirectexecution of rights. As for the agreement-type dormant investments with directexecution of rights, the shareholder qualification of the dormant investor should beconfirmed on internal affairs and the nominal shareholder’s qualification withexternal affairs. As for the non-agreement-type dormant investment, such as aninvestment in other person’s name but without permission or an investment in avirtual person’s name, the shareholder qualification should be confirmed to thedormant investor.Chapter5On perfection: Legal rules and regulations for dormant investmentFirst of all, the chapter reviews all China’s current legal rules and regulationsabout dormant investment. On the one hand it affirms the effectiveness andachievements obtained in the current legal rules and regulations. On the other, itpoints out the flaws and inadequacies in China’s current laws about dormantinvestment. It proposes basic idea and overall principle to perfect legal rules andregulations about dormant investment.The chapter points out, perfection of legal rule and regulations about dormantinvestment should be based on the actual situation of China’s current existing legalsystem and dormant investment in companies. Adhering to forward-looking attitude and systematic design, overall plan, entire framework, perfect China’s relevant legalsystem, i.e. Company law, Contract law, Trust Law, General Principles of the CivilLaw and apply them comprehensively built the system of legal rules and regulationsystematically about dormant investment. On such basis, the chapter highlights theexplanation of3specific framework or system–the obligation to contribute capitalof the dormant investor and the nominal shareholder; the responsibility of faults incapital contribution; the rules of piercing dormant investor’s dual veils.Finally, by applying to Trust Law, in the process of outlining the rights andobligations between the trustor and trustee, notarization of equity investment trustcontract, perfection of record system, etc, the chapter draws up a specific design ofequity investment trust for dormant investment.Chapter6ConclusionThis chapter makes a brief summary of the major viewpoints formed in thethesis and the main systems to be constructed. And it also proposes special areas anddirections deserving further research on legal regulations of dormant investment.更多还原