【作者】 李静；

【导师】 彭真明；

【作者基本信息】 华中师范大学 ， 经济法学， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 股份有限公司(以下简称“股份公司”)的设立，从经济的角度观察是发起人组织人、财、物形成一个具有一定生产经营能力的实体的过程；从法律的角度观察则是发起人依照法律的规定，组建一个具有独立人格的法律主体的过程。可以说，股份公司从策划、组织、出资到登记过程中的任何一个设立行为都是围绕发起人展开的。发起人的行为直接决定着未来公司所涉及的权利义务关系，影响着交易的安全和社会经济秩序的稳定。因此，对发起人行为尤其是发起人民事责任的规制应是公司法的一项重要任务。 本文共分为三个部分： 第一部分分析了股份公司发起人民事责任的概念、性质以及发起人承担民事责任的理论基础。股份公司发起人的民事责任是发起人因在设立公司过程中违反民事法律规范而应承担的侵权责任。发起人承担民事责任是由发起人在设立中公司中所处的特殊法律地位决定的，是发起人拥有较多特权的回应，从根本意义上说它是公司法追求正义、效益理念的结果。 第二部分对英美法系和大陆法系发起人民事责任的立法进行了比较研究，为我国公司立法的完善提供了若干可资借鉴之处。在对英美法系和大陆法系发起人民事责任立法形式和内容比较的基础上，分析了它们在立法形式上分别以判例法为主和以成文法为主的差异，以及在公司成立和公司不能成立两种情形下发起人责任内容上的区别，概括了他们立法上的先进之处和特色部分。 第三部分分析了我国《公司法》关于股份公司发起人民事责任立法的现状与缺陷，并提出了完善我国公司立法的若干建议。我国《公司法》对股份公司发起人的民事责任的规定相对于行政责任、刑事责任而言比重偏少，并且欠缺发起人合同责任、发起人资本充实责任、发起人损害赔偿责任、发起人责任追究机制以及类似发起人的民事责任等方面的规定。公司立法应在考虑我国系属大陆法系的现实情况下，以强化发起人民事责任为中心，依照大陆法系的做法将发起人的民事责任分为公司成立时的责任、公司不能成立时的责任以及类似 dA 硕士掌位论文 ④MASTER’S TlfeSIS发起人的责任加以完善：于公司成立的情形下充实发起人对公司的损害赔偿责任，增设发起人的资本充实责任、对第三人的合同责任以及损害赔偿责任；于公司不能成立的情形下明确公司设立无效时发起人的民事责任，增设发起人的合同责任并充实发起人的设立行为责任；此外，为克服前两种情形下关于发起人民事责任的规定对善意信赖的社会公众利益保护不利的弊端，还应增设类似发起人的民事责任。更多还原

【Abstract】 From the view of economics, the establishing process of joint-stock company is the process which sponsors organize people, capital and resources to make up an entity with the ability of production and management. From the view of law, it is the process which the sponsors construct legal entity with independent personality according to legal provisions. That is to say, the sponsors plan, organize, register the joint-stock company and invest in it. Such actions directly decide the rights and obligations of the future company, effect the safety of transactions and stability of social economic order. So the regulation of sponsors’ action and civil liability is an important task to company act.This paper consists of three parts.The concept and nature of the sponsors’ civil liability and its theoretical basis are analyzed in the first part. The sponsors’ civil liability is the liability of tort when the sponsors violate civil legislations in the process of establishing the company. It’ s decided by their particular status in company. It’ s the restriction on the privileges of them. It’ s the result of company act’ s pursuit of justice and efficiency.In the second part, legislations on sponsors’ civil liability of Anglo-America law system and continent law system are compared. Their advantages can be used by our company act for reference. After comparing the legislative form and content between Anglo-America law system and continent law system, the author first analyzes the difference in the legislative form which the former is based on case law and the later is based on written law and the difference in liability of sponsors whenthe company is found in success or in failure, then generalizes the similarity and particularity of the two law systems.In the third part, some legislative suggestions are put forward based on the analysis of present situation and defects on sponsors’ civil liability of joint-stock company in our company act. Compared to the regulations of administrative responsibility and criminal responsibility, the regulations on sponsors’ civil liability is too weak in our company act, which lacks of the sponsors’ contract liability, liability to make registered capital in full, liability to pay compensation, system of finding out sponsors’ liability and similar sponsors’ liability etc. Because Chinese law belongs to continent law system, our company act should fortify civil liability of similar sponsors and that of sponsors’ when the company is founded in success or in failure. In the case the company is founded in success, our company act should regulate sponsors’ compensation liability to the company, liability to make registered capital in full, contract liability and compensation liability to the third person more specifically. In the case the company is founded in failure, our company act should regulate sponsors’ civil liability on company’ s foundation being declared invalid, contract liability and liability on establishing actions more definitely. Furthermore, company act should supplement similar sponsors’ civil liability to solve the problem that the former regulations can’ t fully protect well-intentioned general public.更多还原