首页|论有限责任公司董事自我交易行为的效力规制

论有限责任公司董事自我交易行为的效力规制

扫码查看
我国原《公司法》第148条第4款对有限责任公司董事自我交易行为的效力规制存在不少缺陷.通过分析2023年新《公司法》立法思路及司法判决思路认为,应将该条文界定为管理性规范,并综合程序因素及实质因素进行效力认定.结合国内外立法经验,构建效力认定规则需包含程序性效力规则、实质性效力规则和董事自我交易违法情形下的法律效力三方面内容.程序上需明确审批权归属并完善信息披露规则、表决权排除规则,实质上需明确审查主体及审查内容.违法情形下,若程序违法需视不同程度进行分别认定,若实体违法则应一律视为无效,以实现董事自我交易违法情形的规制,保障交易公平性及公司利益.
On the validity of regulating the self-trading behavior of directors of limited liability companies
Paragraph 4 of article 148 of China's former Company Law has a number of deficiencies in regulating the validity of directors'self-dealing behavior in limited liability companies.By analyzing the legislative thinking of the new Company Law of 2023 and judicial decisions,it is found that the provision should be defined as a regulatory norm,and the validity should be determined by integrating procedural and substantive factors.Combined with domestic and foreign specific legislative experience,the construction of validity determination rules should contain three aspects:procedural validity rules,substantive validity rules and legal effect in case of directors'self-dealing violation.Procedurally,it is necessary to clarify the attribution of the approval right and improve the information disclosure rules and voting right exclusion rules,and substantially,it is necessary to clarify the main body of the review and the content of the review.In case of violation of the law,if the procedure is illegal,it should be determined separately according to different degrees,and if the entity is illegal,it should be regarded as null and void,so as to realize the regulation of directors'self-dealing violation,and to safeguard the fairness of the transaction and the interests of the company.

directors'self-dealingconflict of interestprocedural validitysubstantive validityobligation of loyaltyregulation

党玺、吴轶雯

展开 >

浙江理工大学法政学院,杭州 310018

董事自我交易 利益冲突 程序性效力 实质性效力 忠实义务 规制

浙江省社会科学界联合会研究课题

2024N012

2024

浙江理工大学学报
浙江理工大学

浙江理工大学学报

影响因子:0.311
ISSN:1673-3851
年,卷(期):2024.52(8)
  • 14