【作者】 刘伟；

【导师】 胡晓静；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 民商法学（专业学位）， 2021， 硕士

【摘要】 股东派生诉讼前置程序的设置本应当起到过滤不适当股东派生诉讼的作用,但是目前我国的相关制度设置并不能起到此作用。根据我国《公司法》的规定,如果股东认为公司利益遭受到侵害的情况下,符合法定条件的股东在书面请求公司提起诉讼之后,公司拒绝提起诉讼、三十天内未答复或者符合“情况紧急”的情形,股东即可以自己的名义代表公司提起诉讼。这样的制度安排之下,只要股东发起提出诉讼的请求,即使公司拒绝提起诉讼,该决定也不能实质上阻止不当股东派生诉讼的发生。我国的股东派生诉讼制度事实上暗含了这样一个逻辑前提,即股东与公司的利益是一致的,股东的一切行为出发点都是公司利益,股东为了公司的利益向法院提起诉讼完全符合我国法律规定的前提条件。然而在现实情况下,股东利益与公司利益不一致的情形不可谓少数,股东可能完全出于自身利益而提起诉讼,无论该诉讼是否于公司有利。但是我国目前的前置程序设置不仅尚未赋予公司合理的抗辩权,也未赋予法院司法审查的权利。如此制度设计的结果是,一些本身并不必要进入诉讼程序或者股东提起的诉讼本身并不适当的情形没有被排除在诉讼程序之外,董事、公司、股东、法院以及其他利益相关主体都会因此付出成本。更为重要的是,我国现行的股东派生诉讼制度安排忽视了公司作为一个独立主体的意愿表达权利,剥夺了公司维护其正当权利的话语权。因此,基于维护公司利益、降低滥诉风险、提高司法效率等诸多方面的利益考量,我国应当在股东派生诉讼制度中引入庭前司法审查制度,由法院在正式诉讼开始之前进行审查,从而在股东利益与公司利益之间进行平衡。为防止股东滥诉,平衡公司与股东之间的利益,各国对于股东派生诉讼的前置程序都作出了不同的制度安排,诸如设置诉讼许可程序、设置诉讼委员会、将股东派生诉讼分为两阶段、提供不起诉理由书等。本文通过分析国外的相关立法以及司法实践,结合我国现实的司法经验,建议在我国股东派生诉讼制度中引入庭前司法审查环节,赋予公司抗辩权,同时充分发挥法院的作用,由法院在进入正式的诉讼程序之前进行审查,将不适当的股东派生诉讼排除在外。构建股东派生诉讼的庭前司法审查制度应当注意以下几点:第一,借鉴国外立法应当立足于目前我国的实际状况,制度的建立应当具有可操作性,注意其与我国现行民事诉讼法的衔接。第二,应当在公司自治与司法审查之间寻求平衡,避免司法过度干预公司治理,反而影响公司自身的发展。第三,保证审查的公正性,在公司利益与中小股东利益之间进行平衡,避免保护中小股东利益成为空谈。更多还原

【Abstract】 The establishment of pre-procedures for shareholder derivative litigation should have played a role in filtering inappropriate shareholder derivative litigation,but the current relevant system settings in our country cannot play this role.According to the“Company Law” of our country,if shareholders believe that the company’s interests have been infringed,the shareholder who meets the legal requirements after requesting the company to file a lawsuit in writing,the company refuses to file a lawsuit,fails to respond within 30 days,or meets the “urgent situation”,shareholders can file a lawsuit on behalf of the company in their own name.Under such an institutional arrangement,as long as a shareholder initiates a request for a lawsuit,even if the company refuses to file a lawsuit,the decision cannot substantially prevent the occurrence of improper shareholder derivative lawsuits.Our country’s shareholder derivative litigation system actually implies such a logical premise that the interests of shareholders and the company are consistent,and the starting point of all shareholders’ actions is the company’s interests.It is completely in line with our country’s laws for shareholders to file a lawsuit for the company’s interests prerequisites.However,in reality,the situation where the interests of shareholders are inconsistent with the interests of the company is not a minority.Shareholders may file a lawsuit out of their own interests,regardless of whether the lawsuit is beneficial to the company.However,our country’s current pre-procedures have not only not given the company a reasonable right of defense,but also have not given the court the right of judicial review.The result of this system design is that some situations that do not need to enter the litigation procedure or that the shareholder’s lawsuit is not appropriate are not excluded from the litigation procedure.Directors,companies,shareholders,courts,and other stakeholders will all pay for it.More importantly,our country’s current shareholder derivative litigation system arrangement ignores the company’s right to express its will as an independent subject and deprives the company of its right to speak for its legitimate rights.Therefore,based on the interests of safeguarding the company’s interests,reducing the risk of abusive litigation,and improving judicial efficiency,our country should introduce a pre-trial judicial review system in the shareholder derivative litigation system to balance interests between the shareholders and company.In order to prevent shareholder abuse and balance the interests of the company and shareholders,various countries have made different institutional arrangements for the pre-procedures of shareholder derivative litigation,such as setting up litigation licensing procedures,setting up litigation committees,and dividing shareholder derivative litigation into two stages,providing a statement of reasons for nonprosecution,etc.Based on the analysis of relevant foreign legislation and judicial practice,combined with our country’s actual judicial experience,this article proposes to introduce pre-trial judicial review into the shareholder derivative litigation system in our country,granting the company the right to defend,and at the same time give full play to the role of the court.Prior to the review of the proceedings,inappropriate shareholder derivative suits were excluded.To construct the pre-trial judicial review system for shareholder derivative litigation,we should pay attention to the following points: Firstly,drawing on foreign legislation should be based on the current actual situation in our country,the establishment of the system should be operable,and attention should be paid to its connection with our country’s current civil procedure law.Secondly,it is necessary to seek a balance between company autonomy and judicial review to avoid excessive judicial interference in corporate governance,which will adversely affect the company’s own development.Thirdly,ensure the fairness of the review,balance the interests of the company and the interests of small and medium shareholders,and avoid protecting the interests of small and medium shareholders from becoming buncombe.更多还原