合伙企业破产特殊问题研究

【作者】 李吉祥；

【导师】 李向彬；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 民商法学， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 合伙企业作为市场主体,在市场经济中发挥着日益重要的作用。作为市场主体参与市场竞争,就应遵循市场优胜劣汰的法则,因此,需要对合伙企业建立市场退出和淘汰机制。在《企业破产法》和《合伙企业法》修订前,我国长期没有承认合伙企业的破产能力。这导致了合伙企业在市场竞争中,出现不能清偿债务时,不能进行破产清算的情形,不利于债权人的平等保护。《企业破产法》修改草案规定,本法适用于企业法人、合伙企业以及合伙人,可谓是破产法上的一个进步。但是,最后通过的《破产企业法》相对于草案来说,出来较大的反复和萎缩,仅仅规定:其他法律规定企业法人以外的组织的破产清算,属于破产清算的,参照适用本法规定的程序。不再明确规定《企业破产法》适用于合伙企业和合伙人。合伙企业对破产法适用的具体制度出现了模糊和不明确性。新修订的《合伙企业法》虽然赋予了合伙企业以破产能力,规定在不能清偿到期债务时,债权人可以根据破产法申请其破产。但是由于合伙企业不能像法人那样具有完全的民事权利能力和民事行为能力,并且合伙人需要承担无限连带责任,因此,在其破产的程序和实体问题上有诸多特别的地方。如,合伙企业的破产申请的主体、破产财产的范围、破产债权的清偿顺序、合伙企业与合伙人的清偿顺序等等,都与企业法人有所不同。但是,《企业破产法》与《合伙企业法》中,专门针对合伙企业破产的法条的规定,仅仅只有两条,对于具体的实体和程序问题,并没有作出专门的规定。在这种情况下,对合伙企业破产的法律适用,必然会遇到许多操作中的具体问题。理论方面,我国在此之前对合伙企业破产的理论研究取得了一定的成果。但是,由于之前并没有合伙企业破产制度,因此以往的研究主要是针对合伙企业是否具有破产能力进行讨论。2006年新修订的《合伙企业法》与《企业破产法》确立了合伙企业破产,从而为合伙企业破产提供了立法基础。因此,就我国而言,笔者认为,对合伙企业破产的研究重点,应从是否应当建立合伙企业破产制度,发展到其具体制度的构建方面。该论文从现阶段对合伙企业破产的理论研究和现实的立法制度出发,结合外国关于合伙企业破产的具体制度和理论研究成果,对我国的合伙企业破产的特殊性进行分析,并提出一定的建议,期望能对完善我国的合伙企业破产制度有所帮助。该论文正文分为四章,共三万五千字左右。本文第一章,主要是介绍合伙企业的基本特点,是合伙人对合伙企业的债务负无限连带责任。通过对合伙企业破产能力的争论,得出合伙企业具有破产能力是合伙企业作为独立的民事主体的必然;是破产法由单纯破产清算、偿还债务,发展为尽量挽救债务人,兼顾债务人、债权人和社会三者利益这样一个理念转变的必然;是我国社会主义法制建设不断发展和市场经济不断发展进步的必然。此外,本章第二节还对破产原因进行了分析,得出合伙企业的破产原因应为合伙企业不能清偿到期债务,而非合伙企业与合伙人同时不能清偿到期债务。第二章,分析了合伙企业破产与合伙人破产之间的关系。合伙企业破产后,合伙人需要承担连带责任,因此可能导致合伙人破产;合伙人破产后,有可能强制执行合伙人在合伙企业中的份额用于清偿个人债务,因此,有可能导致合伙企业财产减少、合伙人变更以及进行清算。当合伙企业破产和合伙人破产出现重叠,两者债权人出现冲突时,可以适用双重优先原则。该原则在平衡合伙企业破产和合伙人破产时,是最为公平的方法。第三章,主要讨论合伙企业破产的程序性问题:破产申请的提出,破产和解及破产管理人。我国仅规定了债权人可以对合伙企业提出破产申请,笔者认为,不仅债权人、债务人,合伙人以债权人的身份也可以提出破产申请,但是合伙人的债权人不能提出合伙企业的破产申请。我国的《合伙企业法》和《企业破产法》并没有明确规定合伙企业在不能清偿到期债务时,合伙企业能够提出破产和解申请。笔者认为,这无疑使合伙企业失去了一次自我挽救的机会,因此我国应该建立合伙企业的破产和解制度。第四章,是从合伙企业破产的实体问题方面讨论,分析合伙企业破产财产和破产债权的特性。笔者认为,合伙企业的破产财产仅包括破产申请受理后至破产程序终结前,合伙企业取得的财产及财产权利,不包括合伙人个人的财产及财产权利。在合伙企业破产债权的申报方面,应通知合伙人的债权人共同申报,预备参加可能出现的合伙人破产的情形。对破产债权的清偿,首先应是职工的工资及劳动保险费用,再次是税款,如果还有剩余才清偿一般债权。其中,首先应清偿一般债权人的债权,其次是有限合伙人,最后是普通合伙人。此外,当一人或部分合伙人进入破产程序,负有连带债务的合伙人,还可以其代替其他合伙人清偿债务的求偿权或将来代替其清偿债务的求偿权作为破产债权,向其申报权利。更多还原

【Abstract】 The partnership enterprise, as a market player, plays an increasingly important role in the market-oriented economy. Being a market player participating in the market competition, it should always follow the rule of ’natural selection’ in market. Therefore, we should build up a Market Retreating and Elimination Mechanism for them.For a long term before the fine amendment of Enterprise Bankruptcy Law, the bankruptcy capacity of partnership enterprises stayed unacknowledged in China. This has lead to absence of bankruptcy liquidation when the enterprise fails to clear its debt in the market competition. This acts in disfavor of the creditor. The Draft Amendments of Enterprise Bankruptcy Law states that it applies to the legal entity, partnership enterprise and copartner - a progress forward indeed. However, contrary to the draft, the final passed Enterprise Bankruptcy Law shows reversion and reduction: it only claims application to bankruptcy liquidation of organizations other than legal entities defined in other laws. And here partnership enterprises and copartners are no longer clearly included. The partnership enterprise feels that the law is ambiguous and unconfirmed on what subjects it actually applies to. The then amended Enterprise Bankruptcy Law grants partnership enterprises bankruptcy capacity, declares that the creditor’s right to apply for bankruptcy legally after failure to repay its debt. However, since the partnership enterprise lacks civil legal capacity and action ability that a legal entity owns, and also the copartner is required to take unlimited joint liability, it presents particularity in bankruptcy procedures and entity status, i.e. entity of partnership enterprise to bankruptcy application, scale of bankrupted property, repayment sequence for bankrupted creditor’s right, repayment sequence for partnership enterprise and copartner, all of which differ from that for the legal entity. Further still, there are only 2 articles in Enterprise Bankruptcy Law and Partnership Enterprise Law that govern bankruptcy in partnership enterprise. None guidance on actual entity and procedures is established. Hence we see problems in implementation and operation. From theory perspective, our previous efforts in research of bankruptcy of partnership enterprise have seen certain achievements. Nonetheless, due to the absence of real bankruptcy case of its kind, the previous research achievements were solely seen in discussion on bankruptcy capacity. In 2006, the newly amended Enterprise Bankruptcy Law and Partnership Enterprise Law have established the concept of bankruptcy of partnership enterprise, and consequently provided legislative authority for it. Therefore, in China, the focus of research should be transferred from whether the bankruptcy system should be established onto how the actual system should be established.This dissertation, starting from current theoretical research and established legislative system on bankruptcy of partnership enterprise, incorporating also model system and theoretical achievements of its kind from foreign countries, aims to analyze the particularity of the bankruptcy in China, and to raise some advice in the hope to assist improvement of our law system in this field.It falls into 4 chapters, of 35,000 words in total.The first chapter focuses on introducing basic characteristics of partnership enterprise, namely the copartner taking unlimited joint liability for debt of the partnership enterprise. Through argument on partnership enterprise’s bankruptcy capacity, it reaches the conclusion that the bankruptcy capacity of such enterprise is an inevitable result of its independent civil entity status, of the transferred conception in bankruptcy law - from simply aiming at bankruptcy liquidation and repayment to the creditor, to the utmost retrieval of the debtor, taking both debtor, creditor and society into consideration; of the continuous development and progress of our socialistic legal system construction and market-oriented economy. Through analysis on causes for bankruptcy, to reach that the cause of bankruptcy of partnership enterprise should be the enterprise’s failure to repay its debt, not the failure from both enterprise and copartner simultaneously.The second chapter analyzes the relation between bankruptcy of partnership enterprise and that of the copartner. After the enterprise’s bankruptcy, the copartner needs to take joint liability which might lead to copartner’s bankruptcy; after bankruptcy of the copartner, the possible forced execution on copartner’s share in the enterprise to repay the debt might further lead to reduction of enterprise’s property, change of copartner and liquidation. When in overlap of bankruptcy for both enterprise and copartner where conflicts of creditors emerge, it is applicable to adopt the dual-privilege principle - the best method to balance bankruptcy of both enterprise and copartner, and to deal with liquidation.The third chapter is to discuss procedures of bankruptcy: lodge of bankruptcy application, bankruptcy conciliation and bankruptcy manager. In China only the creditor is entitled to apply for bankruptcy of the partnership enterprise. The writer thinks that apart from the creditor, the debtor and copartner can also apply for bankruptcy in the name of the creditor, but that the copartner’s creditor cannot. Another fact is that when the partnership enterprise fails to repay its debt it can apply for bankruptcy conciliation as that is not defined in our law. The writer thinks that incontestably denies the enterprise a chance of self-salvation. Therefore, we should establish bankruptcy conciliation system in China.The fourth chapter presents a discussion on bankruptcy entity of partnership enterprise, to analyze the characteristics of bankrupted property and creditor’s right. The writer conceives that bankrupted property should only include property and proprietorship acquired from the time when the bankruptcy application is accepted until when the bankruptcy procedures finish. It should not include the copartner’s private property and proprietorship. When the enterprise wishes to announces a bankruptcy application, it should notify and announce in co-effort with copartner’s creditor. This is to prevent possible bankruptcy of the copartner. On sequence of liquidation, the first priority should be staff’s salary and labor insurance expenditures, the second taxation, and then general creditor’s right if any remains. For general creditor’s right, the first priority goes to general creditor, the second limited copartner, and finally general copartner.更多还原