公司人格否认制度在审判实践中的问题与对策
|
摘要
在我国,现代法人制度确立的时间虽不长,但滥用公司人格的现象却呈蔓延之势。一些人利用股东有限责任制度和法人独立人格,借助公司抽逃资金、隐匿财产,逃避债务,从而使公司之债权人蒙受重大财产损失的现象屡屡发生。随着我国经济的发展,滥用公司法人人格的行为时有发生,也使大量案件进入法院。虽然最高人民法院在当时《公司法》没有修订前也曾经就一些问题作出了相应的司法解释,但显然面对形式多样化的滥用公司人格而侵犯债权的行为,法律的苍白与滞后,给我们在一线的司法工作者在审判实践中带来了感到困惑与不解,有时显得那么的无助。
2005年修订后的《公司法》第二十条以成文法的形式明确规定了公司法人人格否认制度,也就是我们所谓的“揭开公司面纱”制度,其规定是:当股东滥用公司法人独立地位和股东有限责任逃避债务时,该股东即丧失依法享有的仅以出资额为限对公司债务承担有限责任的权利,而应对公司全部债务承担连带责任。该制度的确立,是对公司法人制度的完善与发展。它对于防止公司独立地位的滥用有着非常重要的意义,也是我国立法上的一大进步,具有里程碑的意义。
新《公司法》自2006年1月1日起实施,至今已一年多了,我们发现原有的东西还是难以突破,主要原因是该制度设立的目的在于保护债权人的合法利益免受股东有限责任滥用之侵害,对于债权人的合法权利而言无疑具有积极意义,但是这一制度本身由于缺乏相应的程序规定和配套制度而成为难以实现的停留在纸上的权力,好像仅仅作为法律的一种精神宣誓,那么,不仅会带来司法实践中适用上的混乱,造成审判实践中存在不敢适用或滥用该制度现象,给法律的威严带来损伤。再之,审理此类案件还有个主要问题是原告举证难。
因此,针对经济生活中滥用公司人格的种种现象,结合在审判实践中遇到的问题,针对问题进行原因分析,应对公司人格否认制度在适用条件、举证责任分配、执行中适用、判例指导这四个方面完善,以期充分发挥公司人格否认制度的作用,有效地维护经济健康有序发展。
In our country, though it has not been long since the establishment of modern corporation system, the abuse of corporation personality occurs at a spreading trend. It is not rare that people take the advantage of Limited liability and Independent corporation personality, leverage the corporation to withdraw capital, transfer asset and escape from liability, resulting creditor of the corporation massive financial loss. As the fast development of our economy, it is not rare of the abuse of corporation personality; therefore many cases go to the court. Although National High Court provided judicial explanation before the revision of Corporation Law, obviously facing the various types of abuse of corporation personality and violation of creditor's interest, our legal system had been lagged behind and needed to be further strengthened. It also brought us judicial stuff working at the front-line difficulties.
Clause No. 20 in 2005 revisited version of Corporation Law clearly specifies Disregard of Corporation Personality, or so-called Lifting the Veil of Corporation. The definition is when a Partner is trying to escape from its financial liability via the abuse of independent corporation personality and partner limited liability, this partner then is not eligible for its legal right of only being responsible for its original investment amount as the maximum liability at total corporation liability, and this partner should take extensive responsibility for total corporation liability. The legislative establishment of this system fine-tunes corporation personality; it is a milestone in our legislation to prevent the abuse of independent corporation personality.
It has been more than one year since the effectiveness of the revised version of Corporation Law as of January 1st, 2006; we found it had rarely been a breakthrough, why? Key reason is the establishment of the disregard of corporation personality is to protect creditor's legal interest from the abuse of partner limited liability, the design is positive to protect creditor's equity, however as this new system is lack of relating procedure regulation and corresponsive institution therefore it is hardly practical in real practice and stays as virtual power on paper, just like a spiritual declaration in Corporation Law, then it brings difficulty in judicial practice, resulting either not using Disregard of Corporation Personality or abuse of this system, which could probably bring a negative effect regarding the dignity of the law. Moreover, a major problem in judicial practice is the plaintiff usually has difficulty putting to the proof.
In response to various types of the abuse of corporation personality in current economy, combining with the encountering difficulty in judicial practice, we should analysis the root causes, focus on the areas including eligible condition, evidential responsibility, enforcement principle and judicial guideline, therefore to fully leverage the effect of disregard of corporation personality to guarantee a healthy and orderly economic development.
2005年修订后的《公司法》第二十条以成文法的形式明确规定了公司法人人格否认制度,也就是我们所谓的“揭开公司面纱”制度,其规定是:当股东滥用公司法人独立地位和股东有限责任逃避债务时,该股东即丧失依法享有的仅以出资额为限对公司债务承担有限责任的权利,而应对公司全部债务承担连带责任。该制度的确立,是对公司法人制度的完善与发展。它对于防止公司独立地位的滥用有着非常重要的意义,也是我国立法上的一大进步,具有里程碑的意义。
新《公司法》自2006年1月1日起实施,至今已一年多了,我们发现原有的东西还是难以突破,主要原因是该制度设立的目的在于保护债权人的合法利益免受股东有限责任滥用之侵害,对于债权人的合法权利而言无疑具有积极意义,但是这一制度本身由于缺乏相应的程序规定和配套制度而成为难以实现的停留在纸上的权力,好像仅仅作为法律的一种精神宣誓,那么,不仅会带来司法实践中适用上的混乱,造成审判实践中存在不敢适用或滥用该制度现象,给法律的威严带来损伤。再之,审理此类案件还有个主要问题是原告举证难。
因此,针对经济生活中滥用公司人格的种种现象,结合在审判实践中遇到的问题,针对问题进行原因分析,应对公司人格否认制度在适用条件、举证责任分配、执行中适用、判例指导这四个方面完善,以期充分发挥公司人格否认制度的作用,有效地维护经济健康有序发展。
In our country, though it has not been long since the establishment of modern corporation system, the abuse of corporation personality occurs at a spreading trend. It is not rare that people take the advantage of Limited liability and Independent corporation personality, leverage the corporation to withdraw capital, transfer asset and escape from liability, resulting creditor of the corporation massive financial loss. As the fast development of our economy, it is not rare of the abuse of corporation personality; therefore many cases go to the court. Although National High Court provided judicial explanation before the revision of Corporation Law, obviously facing the various types of abuse of corporation personality and violation of creditor's interest, our legal system had been lagged behind and needed to be further strengthened. It also brought us judicial stuff working at the front-line difficulties.
Clause No. 20 in 2005 revisited version of Corporation Law clearly specifies Disregard of Corporation Personality, or so-called Lifting the Veil of Corporation. The definition is when a Partner is trying to escape from its financial liability via the abuse of independent corporation personality and partner limited liability, this partner then is not eligible for its legal right of only being responsible for its original investment amount as the maximum liability at total corporation liability, and this partner should take extensive responsibility for total corporation liability. The legislative establishment of this system fine-tunes corporation personality; it is a milestone in our legislation to prevent the abuse of independent corporation personality.
It has been more than one year since the effectiveness of the revised version of Corporation Law as of January 1st, 2006; we found it had rarely been a breakthrough, why? Key reason is the establishment of the disregard of corporation personality is to protect creditor's legal interest from the abuse of partner limited liability, the design is positive to protect creditor's equity, however as this new system is lack of relating procedure regulation and corresponsive institution therefore it is hardly practical in real practice and stays as virtual power on paper, just like a spiritual declaration in Corporation Law, then it brings difficulty in judicial practice, resulting either not using Disregard of Corporation Personality or abuse of this system, which could probably bring a negative effect regarding the dignity of the law. Moreover, a major problem in judicial practice is the plaintiff usually has difficulty putting to the proof.
In response to various types of the abuse of corporation personality in current economy, combining with the encountering difficulty in judicial practice, we should analysis the root causes, focus on the areas including eligible condition, evidential responsibility, enforcement principle and judicial guideline, therefore to fully leverage the effect of disregard of corporation personality to guarantee a healthy and orderly economic development.
引文
[1]江平.法人制度论.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1994,428
[2]朱慈蕴.公司法人格否认法理研究.北京:法律出版社,2000,75
[3]石少侠.公司法.长春:吉林人民出版社,1994,11
[4]孔祥俊.公司法理论.北京:人民法院出版社,1997,193-194
[5]ShottV·Treasury Commissioner,1948,29
[6]United States v.Milwaukee Refrigerator Transit CO.,142 Fed 2d 247,255(C.C.E.D.Wis.1905).转引自蔡立东:“公司人格独立与人格否认”,载商法基本问题研究,徐卫东主编.法律出版社,2002,(6):13
[7]L.C.B Gower.Principles of Modem CompanyLaw 1 Sweet &Maxwell,5thed,1081
[8]沈四宝,王军,焦津洪.国际商法.北京:对外经济贸易大学出版社,2002,75
[9]郭卫华编.“找法”与“造法”.法官适用法律的方法.北京:法律出版社,2006,107
[10]C.k.Allen,Law in the Making,P.422.转引自王泽鉴.民法学法与判例研究.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1998,(1):24
[11]谷口安平.程序的正义.载谷口安平.程序的正义与诉讼.王亚新,刘荣军译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1996,14-15
[12]童兆洪.公司法理与实证.法制日报社网站WWW.legaldaily.com.cn.2007-09-28
[13]钱卫清.公司诉讼.北京:人民法院出版社,2004,21
[14]谷绍勇.公司人格否定制度在我国审判实践中的引入问题.中国法院网,2004-03-14
[15]浙江省高级人民法院.关于公司法适用著干问题的理解.浙江审判,2003,3
[16]江苏高级人民法院主编.审判研究.北京:法律出版社,2002,237
[17]王泽鉴.民法学说与判例研究(第一册).中国政法大学出版社,1998,286
[18]我妻荣.新订民法总则.岩波书店.2004,35
[19]朱慈蕴.论公司法人格否认法理的适用要件.中国法学,1998,5
[20]Robert·W·Hamilton,The law of Corporations,West Group,1999
[21]朱慈蕴.论公司法人格否认法理在母子公司中的运用.中国科学,1998,5
[22]See Powell,Parent and Subsidiary Corporations,at 4-6,(1931);114,转引自刘连煜.公司法理论与判决研究.91
[23]赵旭东.新公司法制度设计.北京:法律出版社,2006,38
[24]毕玉谦著.民事证据原理与实务研究.北京:人民法院出版社,2003,78
[25]李国光,王闯.审理公司诉讼案件若干问题.人民法院报,2005-11-28
[26]宋晓明,张勇健.民商事审判若干疑难问题.人民法院报,2006-08-09
[27]李焦,黄金波.关联交易及公司法人人格否认之研究.中国法院网.2003-10-28
[28]Frank H.Easterbrook,Daniel R.Fischel.The Economic Structure of Corporate Law[M],Harvard University press,1997,87
[29]江平,李国光主编.最新公司法案例评析.北京:人民法院出版社,2006,31
[30]United States v.Milwaukee Refrigerator Transit CO.,142 Fed 2d 247,255(C.C.E.D.Wis.1905).转引自蔡立东:“公司人格独立与人格否认”,商法基本问题研究.徐卫东主编.法律出版社,2002,23
[31]叶建强.公司法人人格否认理论之应用.中华会计网校WWW.Chinaacc.com,2007-05-17
[2]朱慈蕴.公司法人格否认法理研究.北京:法律出版社,2000,75
[3]石少侠.公司法.长春:吉林人民出版社,1994,11
[4]孔祥俊.公司法理论.北京:人民法院出版社,1997,193-194
[5]ShottV·Treasury Commissioner,1948,29
[6]United States v.Milwaukee Refrigerator Transit CO.,142 Fed 2d 247,255(C.C.E.D.Wis.1905).转引自蔡立东:“公司人格独立与人格否认”,载商法基本问题研究,徐卫东主编.法律出版社,2002,(6):13
[7]L.C.B Gower.Principles of Modem CompanyLaw 1 Sweet &Maxwell,5thed,1081
[8]沈四宝,王军,焦津洪.国际商法.北京:对外经济贸易大学出版社,2002,75
[9]郭卫华编.“找法”与“造法”.法官适用法律的方法.北京:法律出版社,2006,107
[10]C.k.Allen,Law in the Making,P.422.转引自王泽鉴.民法学法与判例研究.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1998,(1):24
[11]谷口安平.程序的正义.载谷口安平.程序的正义与诉讼.王亚新,刘荣军译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1996,14-15
[12]童兆洪.公司法理与实证.法制日报社网站WWW.legaldaily.com.cn.2007-09-28
[13]钱卫清.公司诉讼.北京:人民法院出版社,2004,21
[14]谷绍勇.公司人格否定制度在我国审判实践中的引入问题.中国法院网,2004-03-14
[15]浙江省高级人民法院.关于公司法适用著干问题的理解.浙江审判,2003,3
[16]江苏高级人民法院主编.审判研究.北京:法律出版社,2002,237
[17]王泽鉴.民法学说与判例研究(第一册).中国政法大学出版社,1998,286
[18]我妻荣.新订民法总则.岩波书店.2004,35
[19]朱慈蕴.论公司法人格否认法理的适用要件.中国法学,1998,5
[20]Robert·W·Hamilton,The law of Corporations,West Group,1999
[21]朱慈蕴.论公司法人格否认法理在母子公司中的运用.中国科学,1998,5
[22]See Powell,Parent and Subsidiary Corporations,at 4-6,(1931);114,转引自刘连煜.公司法理论与判决研究.91
[23]赵旭东.新公司法制度设计.北京:法律出版社,2006,38
[24]毕玉谦著.民事证据原理与实务研究.北京:人民法院出版社,2003,78
[25]李国光,王闯.审理公司诉讼案件若干问题.人民法院报,2005-11-28
[26]宋晓明,张勇健.民商事审判若干疑难问题.人民法院报,2006-08-09
[27]李焦,黄金波.关联交易及公司法人人格否认之研究.中国法院网.2003-10-28
[28]Frank H.Easterbrook,Daniel R.Fischel.The Economic Structure of Corporate Law[M],Harvard University press,1997,87
[29]江平,李国光主编.最新公司法案例评析.北京:人民法院出版社,2006,31
[30]United States v.Milwaukee Refrigerator Transit CO.,142 Fed 2d 247,255(C.C.E.D.Wis.1905).转引自蔡立东:“公司人格独立与人格否认”,商法基本问题研究.徐卫东主编.法律出版社,2002,23
[31]叶建强.公司法人人格否认理论之应用.中华会计网校WWW.Chinaacc.com,2007-05-17
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |