摘要
公司形态随着市场经济的发展呈现出多形式多结构的变化,现有规范无法解决公司经营中所有权和经营权的交叉导致权责不清的问题,母公司中小股东的诉求遭受挤压和忽视,同时也无法为其合法权益提供完整的法律保护。美国和日本是当今世界公司法最为发达的国家,其不同的规制进路为我们提供了不同视域经验:通过着重分析美国和日本两个典型国家诉讼主体资格的认定标准,认定标准涉及对母子公司关系的界定,以及母公司股东资格的认定包括客观、主观以及程序方面等相关问题,从而比较,为我国引进该制度提供理论和实践经验。结合母子公司的业务、经营以及财务状况以认定母子公司关系,本文通过对持股比例和时间进行规定以明确双重股东代表诉讼制度中的原告资格,以实际侵害原则为适格被告的判定标准。
With the development of the market economy, the company form presents changes in multiple forms and structures. The existing norms can not solve the problem of unclear rights and responsibilities caused by the intersection of ownership and management rights in the operation of the company. The demands of minority shareholders of the parent company are squeezed and ignored, but our law can not furnish complete legal protection for their legitimate rights and interests. The United States and Japan are two of the most developed countries in the world, and their different regulatory approaches supply us with a comparative perspective by focusing on the analysis of the standards for determining the qualification of litigation subjects in the United States and Japan, including the definition of the relationship between parent and subsidiary companies, and the determination of the qualification of shareholders of parent companies, including objective, subjective and procedural aspects, from which we analyze their differences and advantages and disadvantages. Theoretical and practical experience could be provided for the introduction of this system in China. The business, operation and financial status of the parent and subsidiary companies could also be combined to identify the relationship between the parent and subsidiary companies. This paper would specify the shareholding ratio and time, clarify the plaintiff qualification in the dual share-holder representative litigation system, and take the principle of actual infringement as the judgment standard of a qualified defendant.
出处
《法学（汉斯）》
2022年第4期401-408,共8页
Open Journal of Legal Science
