The Analysis of Adopting the Discretion to Dismiss System in the Shareholder Meeting with the Procedural Defect

doi:10.15936/j.cnki.1008-3758.2016.03.012

Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science) ›› 2016, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (3): 296-301.DOI: 10.15936/j.cnki.1008-3758.2016.03.012

• Law • Previous Articles Next Articles

The Analysis of Adopting the Discretion to Dismiss System in the Shareholder Meeting with the Procedural Defect

HUA Yi-xin

(Civil， Commercial and Economic Law College， China University of Political Science and Law， Beijing 100088， China)

Received:2015-11-15 Revised:2015-11-15 Online:2016-05-25 Published:2016-07-29
Contact: -
About author:-
Supported by:
-

Abstract

Abstract: The discretion to dismiss system derives from the concept of power disposition. Through balancing of interest， although it is used in juridical practice to improve the efficiency of group behavior and judgment， it is harmful to restrained judicial involvement and reality of the group intention. Through the normative analysis， according to the applicable scope and the legal effect of the Article 22 of Chinese Company Law， the discretion to dismiss can not be applicable. Also， through the system analysis， the discretion to dismiss is not necessary and feasible. The view of adopting the discretion to dismiss system is a misunderstanding to the allocation of rights.It is improper for scholars and practitioners to ignore the laws and apply the system directly.

Key words: procedural defect, discretion to dismiss system, the resolution of shareholder meeting

CLC Number:

D923

HUA Yi-xin. The Analysis of Adopting the Discretion to Dismiss System in the Shareholder Meeting with the Procedural Defect[J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2016, 18(3): 296-301.

References

[1]钱玉林. 股东大会决议瑕疵研究［M］. 北京:法律出版社， 2005:305.
[2]丁绍宽. 股东会瑕疵决议的效力研究［J］. 法学， 2009(6):138-141.
[3]姚涛. 股东会决议程序瑕疵情形效力探析以科斯法律经济学分析为视角［J］. 东南大学学报(哲学社会科学版)， 2011(S1):104.
[4]小川宏幸. 股东大会决议不存在、确认无效之诉、撤销之诉［J］. 公司法评论， 2008(11):182.
[5]李建伟. 公司决议效力瑕疵类型及其救济体系再构建以股东大会决议可撤销为中心［J］. 商事法论集， 2008(2):6.
[6]梁慧星. 民法解释学［M］. 北京:中国政法大学出版社， 1995:316.
[7]朱慈蕴. 资本多数决原则与控制股东的诚信义务［J］. 法学研究， 2004(4):104.
[8]钱玉林. “资本多数决”与瑕疵股东大会决议的效力从计算法则的视角观察［J］. 中国法学， 2004(6):99.
[9]彭冰. 理解有限公司中的股东压迫问题最高人民法院指导案例10号评析［J］. 北大法律评论， 2014(1):89.
[10]李志刚. 略论商事审判理念之实践运用［J］. 人民司法， 2014(15):50.
[11]侯东德. 股东大会决议的契约解释［J］. 理论与改革， 2008(6):120.
[12]刘俊海. 新公司法的制度创新: 立法争点与解释难点［M］. 北京:法律出版社， 2006:384.
[13]谢文哲. 股东会决议撤销之诉研究［J］. 金陵法律评论， 2007(1):24.
[14]李可. 原则和规则的若干问题［J］. 法学研究， 2001(5):73.
[15]王文宇. 进出公司法几点跨领域的观察［J］. 月旦民商法杂志， 2003(9):16.
[16]蔡立东，杨宗仁. 论股东会决议撤销权的主体及其行使［J］. 当代法学， 2008(5):87.
[17]钱玉林. 论可撤销的股东大会决议［J］. 法学， 2007(11):42.
[18]黄学武，葛文. 股东会召集程序瑕疵与撤销一则申请撤销股东会决议纠纷案评析［J］. 法学， 2007(9):138.
[19]郑青义. 对民商事审判法官自由裁量权的规制以司法公信力为视角［J］. 山东审判， 2011(19):72.

The Analysis of Adopting the Discretion to Dismiss System in the Shareholder Meeting with the Procedural Defect

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 10

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	DING Lei. Judicial Determination of the Subject of Exercise of Patient Informed Consent——An Analysis Based on 48 Civil Judgments [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2020, 22(3): 73-82.
[2]	ZHANG Ling. Research on Judicial Application of the Good Faith Clause in Trademarks Squatting [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2019, 21(5): 512-518.
[3]	FEI Yan-ying， ZHAO Liang. The People's Mediation System of China's Intellectual Property Disputes and Its Perfection from the Perspective of Fengqiao Experience [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2019, 21(4): 398-404.
[4]	YUAN Jin-hua. An Analysis on the Responsibility of Assignor of a Motor Vehicle Without Vehicle Annual Inspection in Traffic Accidents [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2018, 20(5): 513-519.
[5]	FEI Yan-ying， REN Wen-hua， LING Li. On the Sinicization of Patent System and the Realization of the Path [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2017, 19(5): 512-517.
[6]	LI Yan. Defining the Interest Character and Establishing the Protection Model of Illegal Works [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2016, 18(4): 405-411.
[7]	CONG Li-xian. On the Credibility Basis of Cyberspace Legalization [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2015, 17(5): 515-520.
[8]	WANG Guo-zhu. Legislative Structure of Indirect Infringement System of Chinas Intellectual Property Also on the Difference Between Indirect Infringement of Intellectual Property and Multiple Tortfeasors [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2015, 17(3): 295-300.
[9]	XU Sheng-quan. On the Implications， Impact and Countermeasures of Patent Troll [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2015, 17(1): 77-81.
[10]	ZHAO Ying. Study on Chinas Legal Protection Mechanism of Lending Between Enterprises 〓 [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2014, 16(3): 297-302.