發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-02-25 20:08

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： 公司人格否認(rèn) 破產(chǎn) 股東責(zé)任 合并破產(chǎn)　出處：《鄭州大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：我國(guó)2005年公司法第二十條首次將公司人格否認(rèn)制度以法律條文的形式在我國(guó)法律中予以體現(xiàn),將該制度正式引入我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐。隨著對(duì)該項(xiàng)制度的逐漸熟悉和理解的不斷深入,法院基于該理論所作出的民事裁決越來(lái)越多。2007年6月1日,我國(guó)正真意義上的破產(chǎn)法開(kāi)始實(shí)行,在破產(chǎn)案件的審理中,司法實(shí)踐者們遇到了在公司存在無(wú)獨(dú)立人格的情形下如何與破產(chǎn)案件的處理進(jìn)行銜接的問(wèn)題。如發(fā)現(xiàn)擬進(jìn)入破產(chǎn)程序的公司可能存在被否定公司人格的情形,是否應(yīng)當(dāng)允許其進(jìn)入破產(chǎn)程序;受理某公司的破產(chǎn)案件后,法院可否直接依職權(quán)作出否定公司人格的裁定,還是僅能通過(guò)利害關(guān)系人提起獨(dú)立的訴訟程序?qū)痉ㄈ巳烁裼枰苑裾J(rèn);是應(yīng)該駁回破產(chǎn)申請(qǐng),還是應(yīng)該對(duì)公司繼續(xù)進(jìn)行清算并要求股東承擔(dān)相應(yīng)的責(zé)任。因我國(guó)破產(chǎn)法實(shí)施較晚,且制定的初衷是為了配合清理落后國(guó)有企業(yè)的經(jīng)濟(jì)政策,破產(chǎn)案件的審理基本圍繞配合政府處置資產(chǎn)、安置職工而進(jìn)行,往往忽略了對(duì)公司人格是否獨(dú)立的考量及判斷。隨著國(guó)有企業(yè)破產(chǎn)潮的退卻,民營(yíng)公司破產(chǎn)案件的增多,公司經(jīng)營(yíng)管理不規(guī)范的常態(tài)化,該問(wèn)題才變得逐漸突出起來(lái)。為了對(duì)此問(wèn)題進(jìn)行梳理,找到合理的解決方式,本文通過(guò)例舉案例,闡明破產(chǎn)案件審理中遇到的涉及否認(rèn)公司人格的具體情形,結(jié)合對(duì)公司人格否認(rèn)制度的理論分析,以及破產(chǎn)制度的理論設(shè)計(jì)和實(shí)踐,探討在企業(yè)破產(chǎn)案件審理中對(duì)人格否認(rèn)制度理論的適用。本文在理論研究、實(shí)證分析及比較論證的基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)在審理破產(chǎn)案件過(guò)程中關(guān)于自然人股東與公司人格混同,以及關(guān)聯(lián)公司之間人格混同在破產(chǎn)程序中如何處理進(jìn)行了分析,得出可以部分清算同時(shí)不豁免股東或?qū)嶋H控制人清償義務(wù),以及合并破產(chǎn)的結(jié)論,可以為目前此方面的司法實(shí)踐提供一定的理論參考。
[Abstract]:In 2005, Article 20th of the Company Law of our country first embodied the system of disavowal of corporate personality in the form of legal provisions, and formally introduced the system into the judicial practice of our country. In June 1st 2007, the bankruptcy law in the true sense of our country began to be put into practice, and in the bankruptcy cases, Judicial practitioners encounter the problem of how to link up with bankruptcy cases where there is no independent personality in the company. If it is found that a company intending to enter bankruptcy proceedings may have a corporate personality denied, Whether they should be allowed to enter bankruptcy proceedings; and whether, after accepting a bankruptcy case of a company, the court shall make a ruling directly according to its authority to negate the personality of the company, Or is it possible to deny the personality of a company as a legal person only through independent proceedings initiated by interested parties; should the bankruptcy application be rejected, Or should we continue to liquidate the company and require the shareholders to bear the corresponding responsibilities. Because the bankruptcy law of our country was implemented relatively late, and the original intention was to cooperate with the economic policy of cleaning up the backward state-owned enterprises. The trial of bankruptcy cases basically revolves around cooperating with the government to dispose of assets and placing staff and workers, often neglecting the consideration and judgment of whether the company's personality is independent. As the tide of bankruptcy of state-owned enterprises recedes, the number of bankruptcy cases of private companies increases. In order to comb the problem and find a reasonable way to solve it, the problem has become more and more prominent with the normality of the non-standard management of the company. This paper clarifies the specific circumstances involving the denial of corporate personality in bankruptcy cases, and combines the theoretical analysis of the system of denial of corporate personality, as well as the theoretical design and practice of the bankruptcy system. On the basis of theoretical research, empirical analysis and comparative demonstration, this paper discusses the intermingling of natural person shareholders and corporate personality in the process of dealing with bankruptcy cases. And how to deal with the personality of affiliated companies in the bankruptcy proceedings is analyzed, and the conclusion that the liquidation can be partial without exempting shareholders or actual controllers from paying off obligations, as well as the conclusion of merger bankruptcy, is concluded. It can provide a certain theoretical reference for the current judicial practice in this area.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：鄭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.92

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 樊紀(jì)偉;;關(guān)聯(lián)公司擴(kuò)張適用公司人格否認(rèn)之檢討——兼評(píng)最高法院指導(dǎo)案例15號(hào)[J];湖南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2016年03期

2 陳思思;;從公司人格否認(rèn)制度看民法與商法的差異性[J];企業(yè)導(dǎo)報(bào);2013年07期

3 繳潔;;公司人格否認(rèn)制度的司法適用[J];重慶科技學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年06期

4 張景峰;試論公司法基本制度[J];河南科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年04期

5 陳東;;論公司人格否認(rèn)原則在破產(chǎn)案件受理中的適用問(wèn)題[J];晟典律師評(píng)論;2005年02期

6 王欣新;論新破產(chǎn)法中管理人制度的設(shè)置思路[J];法學(xué)雜志;2004年05期

7 孟志強(qiáng);論股東有限責(zé)任制度[J];北京工商大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年05期

8 郭升選;“公司人格否認(rèn)”辨[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年03期

9 王衛(wèi)國(guó);論重整制度[J];法學(xué)研究;1996年01期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 劉偉;;公司法人人格否認(rèn)適用的程序限制[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2011年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 劉鄂;公司法人人格否認(rèn)制度在破產(chǎn)法中的適用[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：1534975