【作者】 赵德勇；

【导师】 马俊驹；

【作者基本信息】 西南财经大学 ， 人口学， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 本文用股东资格变动一词概括股东资格的取得和丧失,意在强调股东资格变动的本质是法律关系的变动。而引发股东资格变动的原因可以分为两类,一类为法律行为；一类为法律行为以外的法律事实。其中,基于法律行为的股东资格变动内容较为复杂,无论于公司立法还是司法适用均有进一步加以研究的必要。此外,就不同类型公司中的股东资格变动来讲,有限责任公司中的股东资格变动因涉及人合与资合之结合、民法理念与商法理念之冲突而更值得关注。因此,本文选取基于法律行为的股东资格变动问题作为研究对象,并主要围绕有限责任公司展开分析。论文试图揭示基于法律行为的股东资格变动之基础理论、行为人的能力限制、不同法律行为下的具体变动模式等问题的答案。论文第一章主要分析了股东资格变动的一般理论和实证问题。股东资格应包含人格意义的股东资格和身份意义的股东资格两个层面的内容,前者主要面对行为人的能力限制问题,后者主要面对通过何种途径完成股东资格变动的问题。就私法不同理念与股东资格变动之间的关系,论文认为：一方面民法意思主义理念在股东资格变动中的重要性应给予重视,通过探求当事人“真意”可将股东资格变动中意思表示不甚明确的内容得以合理确定,还可以使股东资格变动中意思表示内容不统一或者有矛盾的情形转为统一。一方面股东资格变动涉及到因交易行为而介入的第三人时,如符合适用条件,应适用外观主义法理解决冲突。就利益衡量与股东资格变动的关系,论文认为立法上的利益衡量,首先应完善围绕公司产生的各个利益主体表达利益诉求的机制,其次,应关注公司立法中的利益选择。司法裁判中的利益衡量,应坚持利益层次的不同位阶而正确处理围绕股东资格变动而产生的具体利益、群体利益和制度利益之间的关系。本章经抽样选取源自北大法宝等信息资源中的自2011年至2013年的105个涉及股东资格认定的案件,研究了股东资格认定纠纷中的具体问题,得出如下结论：绝大部分的股东资格确认案件发生于有限责任公司中；法院审理级别较高以及多判决、少和解的统计结果说明股东资格认定案件中当事人的冲突较为激烈。审理要点中诉讼请求绝大部分为请求确认具备股东资格,请求否认股东资格的案件极为少见且法院一般不予支持。股东资格的原始取得纠纷中,法院的审理要点侧重于调查当事人的“真意”；股东资格的继受取得纠纷中,法院的审理要点集中于协议生效与股东资格变动之间的关系。论文第二章就基于法律行为的股东资格变动之前提要件,即行为人的能力限制进行了研究。自然人能力限制方面：行为能力欠缺者不宜通过购买股份等法律行为而享有股东资格,也不宜作为发起人而享有股东资格；但是可以基于受赠性质的法律行为取得股东资格。就特定行业自然人之股东资格限制问题,论文认为证券从业人员是否可以取得股东资格主要应从解释论入手,认可其可以取得有限责任公司股东资格；公权力机关人员则可以通过购买股票成为上市公司股东,而一般不得充任有限责任公司股东。法人能力限制方面：企业法人如果充任特定行业的公司需具备特定条件,自然人充任唯一股东的一人公司不得再次成为一人公司的股东；非企业法人能力限制方面：论文认为未来立法应从法律层面禁止机关法人充任公司股东；事业单位法人和社会团体法人可适度允许其获取股东资格。论文第三章以有限责任公司为例,对我国学界关于股东资格变动模式的研究进行了梳理,论文认为目前学界试图以一种变动模式统帅所有法律行为导致的股东资格变动,是一种不切实际的做法。债权形式主义变动模式虽结构精美,但是缺乏现行立法的支持；意思主义变动模式虽为部分司法实务所认可,但是有时其忽略公司法的团体法性质。鉴于法律行为的具体表现形式较为多样,以及股东资格变动方式不同,基于法律行为的股东资格变动模式不可强求统一,而是应根据法律行为的类型和股东资格变动方式分别确定变动模式。在第四章中,论文就设立行为中影响股东资格变动(股东资格的原始取得)的有关要素,分析了章程制定和章程内容、出资行为、股东名册、股权凭证、商事登记与股东资格变动之间的关系；在考察境外国家和地区立法以及对我国有关学说评析的基础上,结合2013年《公司法》修改后公司资本制度,认为基于设立行为的股东资格变动应坚持以“制定章程与认缴出资”为核心的意思主义变动模式；股东名册、股权凭证、商事登记均不能直接引起股东资格变动,而是证明股东资格已经存在的证据。同时论文对《公司法解释三》相关条款进行评析,指出该条款未来修改的方向。第五章集中讨论基于股权转让行为的股东资格变动(股东资格之继受取得与相对丧失)。论文首先分析了股权转让法定限制与章定限制对股东资格变动的影响,尤其对同意权制度和优先购买权制度如何影响股东资格变动予以分析。然后就违反限制性规定的股权转让合同之效力进行讨论,认为违反限制性规定的股权转让合同在转让人和受让人之间相对有效,对公司和其他股东不生效力,也不会直接导致股东资格变动,因此也不存在公司和其他股东提起撤销之诉的问题。最后结合《公司法解释三》之相关规定,证成股权转让行为导致的股东资格变动模式应采“转让合同绝对生效与通知公司相结合”的变动模式；股东名册、工商登记为“资格外观”。第六章围绕异议股东请求回购行为导致的股东资格变动(股东资格之丧失)展开研究。论文分析了异议股东行使回购请求权情形下回购行为的法律性质,认为该行为并非形成权行使后的单方行为,也不是普通合同中的双方行为；而是一种强制缔约行为。在此基础上论文研究了回购行为所受的请求人资格和回购情形的两方面限制。最后通过分析回购行为的核心条款如何达成,认为基于回购行为的股东资格变动模式为“实际支付价款主义变动模式”,并对此模式做了具体分析。第七章集中讨论基于除名行为的股东资格变动问题。继初步分析除名制度的法理基础后,论文论证了除名行为的法律性质,指出其既具有单方行为的性质,同时也是法律行为中的决议行为。单方行为性质需要关注其行为权源；而合议行为的关键是意思如何形成。针对除名事由,论文认为对于法定除名事由须注重事由性质与定量范围；章定除名事由则应存在特定边界且制定程序应当合法；法定除名事由和章定除名事由以外的事由,应由法院对该事由进行审查。论文对《公司法解释三》所列除名事由进行了解释论和立法论层面的论述。就基于除名行为的股东资格变动,论文在比较法研究的基础上,认为应根据除名事由的不同而分别采“公权介入变动模式”或者“公司自治变动模式”。本文可能存在的创新之处体现于以下几个方面：第一,将股东资格的取得与丧失盖之以股东资格变动,有利于揭示这一事物的本质在于法律关系的变动。第二,突破股东资格变动的传统分类,从股东资格变动的原因入手将其分为基于法律行为的股东资格变动和基于其他法律事实的股东资格变动。第三,也是最重要的,论文试图揭示学界流行的以一种一般模式统帅所有变动类型的理论只能是一种理想,因而论文从法律行为的不同类型出发,根据每种类型之不同法理基础、相关因素,运用利益衡量和比较分析等研究方法,论证各自情形下的股东资格变动模式。更多还原

【Abstract】 Changes of qualification of shareholder include the acquisition and loss of qualification of shareholder. The reason on changes of qualification of shareholder can be divided into two types, the first one is legal act, and the other one is the legal fact outside legal acts. In which, changes of qualification of shareholder, based on legal acts, has complex contents, it is necessary to further study no matter in company legislation or judicial application. In addition, as for the changes of qualification of shareholder of different types of companies, the changes of qualification of shareholder of Limited Liability Company will deserve more attention due to involving the combination between personnel combination and capital combination, as well as the conflict between the civil law concept and commercial law concept. Therefore, this paper chooses the changes of qualification of shareholder based on legal acts as the object of study, and which is mainly limited around the Limited Liability Company. This paper attempts to uncover the answers of changes of qualification of shareholder based on legal acts, including general theory, capacity limitations of doers, the specific changes under different legal acts and other questions. In addition to the introduction and postscript, the paper can be divided into two major blocks. The first block from chapter1to chapter3,which basically can be regarded as the "overview";the second block from chapter4to chapter7, which basically can be regarded as "sub-overview".Chapter1of this paper mainly analyzes general theoretical and empirical issues of changes of qualification of shareholder. As for the basic meaning of qualification of shareholder, this paper notes that the qualification of shareholder should contain the contents at two layers between the qualification of shareholder of personality meaning and the qualification of shareholder of identify meaning, while the former mainly faces the capacity constraint issues of doers, the latter mainly faces the issues of completing the changes of qualification of shareholder through what kind of approaches. As for the relationship between different concepts of private law and the changes of qualification of shareholder, this paper thinks after research that, on the one hand, special attention should be given to the importance of the concensualism concept of civil law in the changes of qualification of shareholder, we should confirm rationally the contents without clear expression in the changes of qualification of shareholder through seeking the "real intention" of parties involved, also can make unify the skimble-scamble or conflicting situations of intention in the changes of qualification of shareholder. On the other hand, when the changes of qualification of shareholder involve any third person caused by trading behavior, if it meets the suitable condition, we should adopt representation legal doctrine to solve conflict. As for the relationship between interest balancing and the changes of qualification of shareholder, this paper thinks that we should perfect and go around the mechanism of various stakeholders expressing interests’ expression produced by the company at first; second, we should focus on the interests’ selection of the company legislation. As for the interest balancing in judicial adjudication, we should insist on the relationship of different ranks of interest level among specific interests, group interests and system interests produced by correctly handling and surrounding the changes of qualification of shareholder. The chapter has selected105cases involving qualification of shareholder from2011to2013from Chinalawinfo and other information resource through sampling, has studied the specific issues in the dispute of qualification of shareholder, and come to the conclusion:the vast majority of confirmation case of qualification of shareholder occurs in Limited Liability Company; higher court hearing level and less reconciliation statistical results show that the conflict of the parties is more intense in the affirmation cases of qualification of shareholders.The most part of claims in trial points is requesting to confirm that it owes the qualification of shareholder, the case of requesting to deny the qualification of shareholder is quite rare, and court doesn’t support in general. In the dispute got from the original qualification of shareholder, the court’s trial points focus on investigating the "meaning" of the parties; in the dispute got from the inheritance of qualification of shareholder, the court’s trial points focus on the relationship between protocol validation and changes of qualification of shareholder.Chapter2of this paper deals with research to the premise condition of changes of qualification of shareholder based on the law acts, that is, the capacity constraints of doer. As the aspect of capacity constraints of natural person:this paper believes that the natural person of lacking capacity constraints cannot lump under one head. The natural person of lacking capacity constraints cannot enjoy the qualification of shareholders through purchasing shares and other legal acts, and shall not enjoy the qualification of shareholders as sponsor; but the natural person of lacking capacity constraints can obtain the qualification of shareholders based on the law behavior with the recipient nature. As for the natural person’s limit problem of the qualification of shareholders at specific industry, the paper thinks whether securities practitioners can get the qualification of shareholders or not mainly should start from interpretative theory, and recognizes that they can get the qualification of shareholders of Limited Liability Company; officials of state organs can become the shareholders of listed companies through purchasing shares, but it is not allowed to hold the position of shareholder of Limited Liability Company in general. As for the artificial person capacity restrictions, if the enterprise artificial person holding the position of a company of specific industry needs to meet a certain condition; if a natural person holding the position of a one-man company with sole shareholder shall not become the shareholder of the one-man company; as for the non-enterprise artificial person capacity constraints, the paper thinks that it should be forbidden to let the official organ as an artificial person hold the position of a company from the level of law; artificial person of institution and social organization may be appropriate to allow their to obtain qualification of shareholders.The Chapter3of this paper takes Limited Liability Company as an example, and analyzes the model problem of the changes of qualification of shareholder based on legal acts.The paper thinks though the change model of formalism of creditor’s rights is elegant, it lacks the support of current legislation; though the change model of concensualism is supported by part of the judicial practice, it sometimes ignores the nature of judicial organization law. In view of the diverse specific manifestation of legal acts, and different change models of qualification of shareholder; based on the change models of qualification of shareholder of legal acts which should not be unified forcefully, but should respectively determine their change models according to the type of legal acts and the change models of qualification of shareholder.The Chapter4analyzes the relationship among the formulation of constitution, contents of constitution, investment behavior, stock ledger, share certificates, commercial registration and the changes of qualification of shareholder based on the relevant elements of affecting the changes of qualification of shareholder in the establishment behavior (original acquisition of qualification of shareholder);on the basis of study abroad national and regional legislation as well as China’s relevant doctrine comments, combining with the company capital system after Company Law was revised in2013,the paper thinks that the changes of qualification of shareholder based on establishment behavior should adhere to the change models of concensualism of taking "formulation of regulations and subscription capital" as a core; register of shareholders, share certificates, commercial registration cannot directly cause the changes of qualification of shareholder, but can prove the evidence of existing qualification of shareholder. Meanwhile this paper analyzes Item1of Article23,Article24of Interpretation Three of Company Law, and points out the direction of future changes of the article.Chapter5focuses on (the derivative acquisition and relative loss of qualification of shareholder) the changes of qualification of shareholder based on equity transfer behavior. This paper analyzes the impact from statutory restrictions of equity transfer and regulation to the changes of qualification of shareholder at first, especially analyzes how the consent right system and preemptive right system influence the changes of qualification of shareholder. Then it discusses the effectiveness of equity transfer contract violating restrictive provisions, this paper thinks that the equity transfer contract violating restrictive provisions is relatively effective between transferor and transferee, it has produced no effect to the company and other shareholders, and don’t directly cause the changes of qualification of shareholder, therefore, it does not exist the problem of company and other shareholders initiating cancellation proceeding. Finally combining the regulations of Item2of Article23, Article24of Interpretation Three of Company Law to prove that the change models of qualification of shareholder caused by equity transfer behavior should adopt the changes model of "the combination between transfer contract absolutely taking effect and notifying the company"; qualification of shareholders, industrial and commercial registration are "qualification appearance".Chapter6expends research around objection shareholder request repurchase behavior leading to the changes of qualification of shareholder (the loss of qualification of shareholder). This paper analyzes the legal nature of repurchase behavior under the case of objection shareholder exercising appraisal right; it thinks that this behavior is not the unilateral action after forming the exercising right, neither the two side’s behavior of ordinary contract; it is a compulsory contracting behavior. Based on this, this paper has studied two aspects of restriction between the claimant qualification and repurchase situation suffered by repurchase behavior. Finally it analyzes how achieve the core clauses of repurchase behavior, thinks that the changes model of qualification of shareholder based on repurchase behavior is "the model of actually paying the remuneration doctrine change", and has made a detailed analysis to such model.Chapter7focuses on discussing the changes of qualification of shareholder based on expulsion behavior. Following the legal basis analysis of expulsion system, the paper demonstrates the legal nature of the expulsion behavior, and has pointed out that it not only has the nature of unilateral act, but also is the resolution behavior of legal.acts. The nature of unilateral acts needs to focus on its behavior right source; and the key of collegial behavior is how to form mean, In view of the expulsion reason, this paper thinks that, as for the legal expulsion reason, we should pay more attention to the reason properties and quantitative scope; the expulsion reason regulated by the provisions of the internal rules and regulations should exist specific boundary and its procedures shall be formulated according to the law; the reason outside the legal expulsion reason and the expulsion reason regulated by the provisions of the internal rules and regulations should be reviewed by court. This paper deals with the discussion at the level of interpretative theory and legislation theory to the expulsion reason listed in Article18of Interpretation Three of Company Law. As for the changes of qualification of shareholder based on expulsion behavior, this paper thinks we should adopt "the change model of state organs involving" or "the change model of company autonomy" based on the different expulsion reasons.更多还原