【作者】 赵学刚；

【导师】 许明月；

【作者基本信息】 重庆大学 ， 环境与资源保护法学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 有限责任公司作为一种独立的企业法律形态,通过从典型的人合企业到纯粹的资合性企业的过渡,拓展了投资者选择的空间。经过一百多年的发展,有限责任公司为经济的发展贡献巨大,有限责任公司法律制度也逐渐完善。但是,相对于其他企业法律形态漫长的演变历史,这一百多年实在短暂;而且,在这一百多年中,由于其固有的局限性甚至弊端,有限责任公司的正当性总是不断的受到理论的质疑,有限责任公司在理论上总是徘徊于存与废之间。在全球公司法修改浪潮的背景下,有限责任公司及其法律制度再次面临存与废的考验。因此,理性的诠释有限责任公司、检讨有限责任公司法律制度的构建不仅对于公司法制的完善,而且对于公司之于社会和经济的功能意义重大。有限责任公司在创设之始即吸纳了股份有限公司和合伙企业的部分属性,从而在实践中表现出形态上的优势,而这种形态上的优势,恰恰契合了特定投资者的特定需求。有限责任公司法律制度的供给,其实施的功效正在于有限责任公司为投资者所选用,以实现投资者的预期利益。因此,法律制度的构建必须充分的维护有限责任公司股东的预期利益,从而使有限责任公司作为一种独立的企业法律形态在企业组织形式“生态”中发挥重要的功能。投资者选择有限责任公司作为投资的组织形式,不仅仅局限于考虑风险与责任的直接利润回报,还包括为企业所雇佣的雇佣利益,以及参与企业的管理利益。而投资者对有限责任公司寄托的预期利益,是建立在有限信息基础之上对于公司未来经营的主观预测、评价与期待;而且,由于有限责任公司本身的局限性、股东的利益冲突,所以,预期利益的实现并非自然的正常过程。相反,制度和实践中存在众多干扰预期利益实现的障碍。因此,法律必须在平衡与股东预期利益相关的各种利益的基础上,尽可能的保护和实现股东的预期利益。尽管有限责任公司股东可以在相当程度上基于自治而解决其利益冲突,但是,法律保持适当的干预是必要的。所以,在自力救济的能力和范围之外,法院也必须提供适当的救济。德国在司法实践中仅仅把强制解散作为最后的救济方式,而通过判例发展了退股和开除两种方式。而美国同样也将强制解散公司作为最后的救济方式,并在司法中拓展了买断、信义义务、仲裁等多种方式作为替代性救济方式。两大法系救济的实质都是平衡公司中存在的各种利益,立法和司法给股东预期利益提供救济的评判标准就是利益平衡基础之上保护股东的合理预期。为了充分发挥有限责任公司的效用,我国同样也必须以合理预期作为利益平衡和裁判的标准,完善有限责任公司法律制度。以此视角检讨我国的有限责任公司法律制度,首先在立法上必须正视有限责任公司的本质属性,从而限制国家的过度干预,应当尊重投资者,即以投资者为本位;在司法中必须谨慎而妥当的解决股东的利益冲突。其次,在具体制度的建构上,必须通过制度激励股东自觉的维护公司中与公司之外的利益平衡,最大限度的实现所有股东的预期利益。与股东预期利益保护最直接相关的制度是利润分配制度和公司僵局的救济制度。利润分配压制使被压制股东的预期利益落空,由于股权转让的限制,股东难以充分有效的退出公司,其在公司的投资和收益被锁定。公司僵局不仅使所有股东的预期利益可能遭受不可避免的损失,而且,也抑制了有限责任公司为社会创造财富的可能。因此,在微观上,为保护股东的预期利益,我国的有限责任公司法律制度必须完善有限责任公司利润分配制度和公司僵局的救济制度。更多还原

【Abstract】 As an independent enterprise legal forms, Limited Liability Corporation widens the choice for the investor by connecting the purely person-depending enterprise and the purely capital-depending enterprise. During its development for over one hundred years, Limited Liability Corporation contributed greatly to the economy, and its legal system is gradually perfected. However, comparative to the long evolution history of the other enterprise legal forms, its history is too short; further, because of its inherent shortcoming, its legitimacy is always subject to be doubted theoretically, and in theory, Limited Liability Corporation faces maintaining or abolishing. Therefore, annotating Limited Liability Corporation rationally and reviewing the building of the legal system have significance not only to the perfection of the corporate legislation, but also to the corporate social and economic function.From the beginning, Limited Liability Corporation adopted some attributes of the Stock Limited Liability Corporation and some attributes of the partnership enterprise to put up its modal advantage in practice, and just the advantage corresponds to the particular demands of some investors. The virtue of the the legal system supply just lies in the choice of the investor to realize his anticipation interest. Therefore, the building of the legal system must sufficiently maintain the anticipation interest of the stockholder of Limited Liability Corporation; thereby, Limited Liability Corporation exerts its important function as an independent enterprise legal form in the ecology of the enterprise organizational forms. The investor chooses Limited Liability Corporation, not only because of the derect profit considering from the risk and liability, but also because of the employ interest and management interest from the enterprise.But the anticipation interest of the investor in Limited Liability Corporation is subjective forecast,valuation and expectation of the future corporate management based on the limited information; Moreover, because of its own limit and the interest conflict of the shareholder, the realization of the anticipation interest is not a natural process. By contrast, there are some obstacles in the system and the practice. Therefore, the law must banlance various interests related to the anticipation interest of the shareholder, protect and realize the anticipation interest of the shareholder as possible. Although to some extent, the shareholder can resolve the interest conflict himself, but it is nessary for the law to keep appropriate intervention. So beyond the ability and scope of self relief, the law and the court should provide appropriate relief. The German court only rely on the dissolution as the last resort, but created withdrawal and expulsion, while the dissolution is also the last relief in America, and buyout, fiduciary duty, arbitration and other remedies were developed in the court. The essential of the two Legal Systems remedy is to balance the interest in the corporation, and the judging standard in the legislation and judicatory for remedy is to protect the reasonable expectation after balancing the interests.For exerting the avail of the Limited Liability Corporation sufficiently, we also must perfect the legal system of Limited Liability Corporation by using the reasonable expectation as the standard to the interest balance and judgment. Reviewing our corporation system from this perspective, the legislation must face the natural attribute of Limited Liability Corporation, and limit the excessive intervention to respect the investor, that is, the primacy and standard of the investor. In the judicial practice, we should be cautious to resolve the interest conflict of the shareholder validly. In the building of specific system, we must promote the shareholder to maintain the interest balance in the corporation and outside the corporation self-consciously. And maybe the dividend distributing system and the remedy system for the deadlock are the directest systems correlative to the shareholder interest protection. Dividend oppression makes the anticipation interest of the oppressed shareholder frustrated, he is difficult to retreat from the corporation, his investment and income in the corporation is locked-up for the restriction of the share. The deadlock not only makes the anticipation interest facing unavoidable loss, but also restrains the corporation creat wealth for the society. Therefore, from the anticipation interest perspective, our Limited Liability Corporation legal system must perfect the the dividend distributing system and the remedy system of deadlock.更多还原