摘要
隐名股东在案外人执行异议之诉中,是否享有足以排除执行的民事权益,存在肯定说与否定说两种不同观点。不同观点的背后,隐含着商事外观主义下的信赖保护、法律秩序清晰明确的要求与尊重经济事实的实质主义之间的价值碰撞。隐名股东执行异议之诉的争议焦点,主要是隐名股东对执行标的享有的权益的类型,以及名义股东的债权人是否属于善意第三人。对此,应当回归股权变动模式、外观主义等基本理论和规定,即隐名股东显名前仅享有债权,不享有足以排除执行的民事权益;隐名股东显名后,其排除执行的主张原则上应当得到支持,不过存在若干例外情形,比如债权人因信赖权利外观而授信、债权人为善意的股权交易相对人、债权人对股权享有质权等。
In a third-party objection lawsuit against enforcement,the question of whether a dormant shareholder possesses civil rights and interests sufficient to exclude enforcement is subject to two opposing doctrines:the affirmative theory and the negative theory.Underlying this divergence is a clash of legal values between reliance protection under the commercial rechtsschein theorie,the demand for clarity and predictability in legal order,and substantive justice that prioritizes economic realities.The core issues in such lawsuits center on two aspects:the nature of rights and interests held by the dormant shareholder in the subject property,and whether creditors of the nominal shareholder qualify as bona fide third parties.To address these issues,it is essential to examine foundational legal doctrines,including the rules governing equity transfer and the rechtsschein theorie.Before obtaining equity,the dormant shareholder merely holds contractual claims against the nominal shareholder and therefore lacks possessory rights sufficient to block enforcement.Once the dormant shareholders obtain equity,their claim to exclude enforcement shall generally prevail,except in the following circumstances:where creditors extend credit in reliance on the ostensible ownership of the nominal shareholder;where creditors act as bona fide purchasers in equity transactions;or where creditors hold perfected security interests over the equity interests.
作者
单祖果
王毓莹
SHAN Zuguo;WANG Yuying
出处
《经贸法律评论》
2025年第3期19-36,共18页
Business and Economic Law Review
基金
国家社会科学基金一般项目“执行异议之诉实体审查规则研究”(项目批准号:20BFX086)。
关键词
隐名股东
案外人执行异议之诉
排除执行
股东资格
Dormant Shareholders
Third-Party Objection Lawsuit Against Enforcement
Exclusion of Enforcement
Shareholders’Qualifications
作者简介
单祖果,北京市大兴区人民法院党组副书记、副院长;王毓莹,法学博士,中国政法大学法律学院教授。