【作者】 李飞；

【导师】 柳经纬；

【作者基本信息】 厦门大学 ， 民商法学， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 二战后在世界范围内出现的一个引入关注的现象就是股东法人化,其中公司股东是股东法人化的主要表现形态之一。我国1993年《公司法》关于严格限制公司转投资的规定不但悖于经济现实,还因为其规定本身就存在诸多技术问题,导致了学者们长期以来对之不断攻击与检讨。2005年新修订的《公司法》有针对性地做出了大幅改进,成果显著,但是仍旧没有彻底放开转投资对象方面的限制,而且新的规定本身过于简洁,对一些具体问题如何处理尚未有明朗化法律条文,这便需要我们依据法律解释的方法做一番推论以资应对公司实务。这些内容就构成了转投资的一般问题,具有“总则”的意味。但这并不能解决所有问题,特别是公司转投资中的“交互持股”因具有鲜明的个性色彩且为新《公司法》所遗忘,于是,着重于将来公司法律的再修订,以立法论的视角继续做一些深入的工作成为一项必然之举。这对于我国《公司法》进一步走向完善、严谨不无裨益。本文主体部分包括两章。在第一章中,首先结合理论、立法认真检讨了“转投资”的概念,分析了一些有代表性的观点,并尝试性地做出了新的界定;其次联系新《合伙企业法》的规定,考查了公司可否作为合伙人的问题,而这对于重新核定公司转投资的对象很有必要;随后就转投资的决议机制问题做出了较为全面解释,明确了董事会可以在公司章程没有决议机制的规定或规定不明情况下的决议权,并可以将该项权力授予公司经理行使;再次,基于多角度的解释作业,回答了公司违法转投资的不同情形下的不同法律效力问题;最后,简要地提到了转投资与关联企业的关系,以及新《公司法》的相应欠缺。第二章聚焦于研讨公司交互持股的问题。首先详细分析了交互持股的概念及其法律隐喻,并构成该章的理论前提;其次阐述了交互持股盛行的普遍原因,力图深化人们关于交互持股的多向度的理解;随后关注了英美法系、大陆法系主要国家的立法实践,总结了各自的特点;之后在返归于我国法律现状的基础上提出了从横向、纵向两个方面去实现法律规制的立法设想。更多还原

【Abstract】 It’s a prominent phenomenon that of the legal person as shareholder to be dominant in the economy around the world after World-WarⅡ. However, corporation is a leading role among the shareholders of legal person. After promulgated in 1993, the former Corporation Act of P.R.C. was criticized fiercely for a long time not only because of its attitude of being against the economic phenomenon mentioned above, but also some technological drawbacks in it. It’s surely the main reason that changes to be made in the newly revised Corporation Act of P.R.C. correspondingly. Though much progress has been achieved, there are still limits to corporate reinvestment permitted by law, and the relative clauses are expressed too succinct to handle problems in practice. There for, interpretative work needs to be done accordingly in line with scientific methodology. All of those mentioned above can be taken as the“general rules”to regulate corporate reinvestment. However, it is not enough to the complicated case of corporate cross-holdings that inherited with peculiar traits of its own. So, it is helpful to go forward to do much more related research for another revision of Corporation Act.Two chapters are included in the paper as the main contents. There are five essential points in chapter one. The concept of“reinvestment”is the focus of my attention at first. Based on several critical analyses, a new concept is offered in a tentative manner. In order to understand weather it is allowed to be a corporate partner under the newly revised Partnership Enterprise Act of P.R.C., some further steps are followed carefully and thoroughly. The corporate resolution mechanism itself is clear to applicability after the comprehensive interpretation: the board of directors is qualified to take the resolution of corporate reinvestment, and the mangers can be authorized to get the power by the board. From angles of interpretation, the ambiguity of weather it is valid or not when unlawful corporate reinvestment occurs is finally cleared up. Actually, the answer is weather it is valid or not depends on the violation of different clauses. Finally, the relation of corporate reinvestment and affiliated corporations is mentioned with simplicity as the last issue of this chapter.The topic of chapter two is corporate cross-holdings. The concept of corporate cross-holdings and its connotation as the theoretical premise would be the first important difficulty to overcome. Then, a description of the origin of corporate cross-holdings is given to illustrate a realistic attitude towards the topic of this chapter. After an investigation of corresponding legislations in those different countries of the two existing distinguished law systems, a comparison with that of in China is followed. With an aim to put an end to the backwardness of relative legislations, the paper proposes to take revision in the aspects of lateral corporate cross-holdings, and corporate cross-holdings of parent-son corporations.更多还原