【作者】 陈思；

【导师】 罗培新；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 经济法学， 2009， 硕士

【摘要】 商业判断规则是美国公司法领域中颇有特色的一项法律规则,是从董事注意义务发源而来的,并在判例法中得到了完善和发展。它表达了法官对于经营世界一种尊重,给予了公司董事正当经营行为的一种保护。在80年代后,商业判断规则有了新的发展,其在公司并购领域应用中的修正,形成了修正商业判断规则,给美国的并购市场带来了蓬勃生机。它促进了经济的巨大发展,吸引了全世界范围法律学者的研究和关注。相对的,欧洲国家在公司并购中普遍采用的则是源自于英国的“严格中立主义”制度。由于“严格中立主义”的规定太过僵化,因而当前欧洲各国正探索运用修正商业判断规则的优点,对“严格修正主义”进行修正。于是2004年通过的《欧洲关于收购要约的第2004／25／EC号指令》规定允许成员国对“严格中立主义”原则进行选择性接受。我国2006年生效的新《公司法》和新《证券法》在内容中吸收了较多英美法的元素,比如董事信义义务制度的构建以及上市公司收购规则的建立等。于此同时,《上市公司收购管理办法》也丰富了《公司法》和《证券法》的内容。从整体上来看,我国在公司并购领域的法律主要吸收了英国的模式,但规定也远非完善,需要对各国的立法进行借鉴,并结合自身的特点作进一步的探索。本文的第一章,对商业判断规则中的各种法律要素进行了追根溯源,分析了其法律渊源,并且对其法律价值和法律运行进行了总结,作为下文对于修正商业判断规则的分析和研究的一个基础。本文的第二章介绍了修正商业判断规则,并运用了法经济学等研究方法对其信赖基础的重建、责任分段设置以及举证责任倒置三个方面的正当性进行了分析。本文的第三章运用了案例研究和对比研究的方法,分析了修正商业判断规则在运用过程中的三个较难的法律问题：Revlon规则触发时机、拍卖阶段资产浪费行为的认定以及股东权力主导下收购中的董事责任。本文的第四章阐述了欧洲在公司并购领域的法律规定,并以德国为例,展示了欧洲国家在运用修正商业判断规则对“严格中立主义”的修正情况。文章接下来比较了两种制度的优劣点,并介绍了欧洲在这一领域的法理探索。这对于我国探索运用修正商业判断规则的研究有着重大的借鉴意义。本文第五章对我国目前公司并购的法律现状进行了分析,思考了修正商业判断规则运用于我国公司并购领域所存在的法律问题,并探索了对于这些法律问题的解决思路。更多还原

【Abstract】 As a quite distinctive law rule in American corporation laws field, the Business Judgment Rule (BJR) is originated from duty of care, which is a branch of director’s fiduciary duty. It has been perfected and developed in case law system.It expresses judges’attitude of respect towards the business world and offers protection to the legitimate business management of company’s directors.After the age of 80s, with the development of business judgment rule, particularly in the amendment of application in the field of corporate Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A), thus forms Modified Business Judgment Rule, which has brought the United States’M&A Market vitality, and promote the tremendous economic development, thus attract a range of legal scholars all over the world attention and engage in studying.Relatively, Strict Neutrality Rule was widely adopted by European countries during the procedure of M&A. Since it is too rigid, European countries are all exploring the application of the advantages of modified BJR and make amend to strict neutrality rule. So in the year 2004 "Directive 2004/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on takeover bids" allows its member to accept strict neutrality rule Optionally. In our country, The Corporation Law and Security Law which come into effective in 2006 also enrolls a lot of elements in law of the United States and Britain, such as the establishment of director’s fiduciary duty and the takeover rules of listed companies.In the mean time, "the Takeover of Listed Company Administrative Code" also enriches the content of the Corporation Law and Security Law. The law mainly adopts the British mode, but it is still far from perfect and needs further exploration to draw on the experience of the legislation of other countries and combination of our own characteristics.Chapter I of this article traces various Legal elements in Business Judgment Rule, analyzes its sources of law, and summarize its legal value and legal operation. These have laid foundation for the analysis and research of the modified BJR in the following text.Chapter II introduces Business Judgment Rule and analyses three aspects including the rebuilding of its trust foundation, differing of duties in two phases, and the shifting of proof burden.Chapter III of this article analyses three pretty difficult legal issues during the application of Business Judgment Rule:the trigger time of Revlon rule, of waste of assets during the auction period and the duties of director under the lead of shareholder’s power during acquisition.Chapter IV expounds the European legal rule in the field of corporation M&A and the situation of amendments of strict Neutrality Rule in the European countries via using German as a example. In the following texts, the article compares the advantages and disadvantages of the two systems and introduces the European exploration of law theory in this field. This has tremendous significance to our research of modified BJR.更多还原