学位论文题名  对我国公司购并的立法思考
论文作者      王刚
作者单位      吉林大学
专    业      法理学
指导教师      张文显
并列题名      Consideration on legislation of company acquisition & merger in China
学位级别      303
中文文摘
    公司购并行为本身是证券市场发展到一定阶段以后的产物，而我国证券市场无论是从技术上还是从立法上都处在发育、成长的阶段，有关公司购并法律、法规和规章的条款规定的简单、原则，实际操纵性差，造成了公司购并实际运作的困难。由于公司购并行为涉及证券法、公司法、税法、劳动法、反垄断法等诸多部门法律且利益主体复杂多样，其自身以具有较高技术性和操作性。因此，如何从立法上考虑，建立一套公正合理的公司购并法律制度是需要认真研究的问题。本文通过在对公司购并理论简要的介绍同时，对英美法系和大陆法系的公司购并立法的原则和状况作简单考察，并结合我国公司购并立法所存在的缺陷和不足，提出在我国建立体系化公司购并法律体系的设想和建议。一、本文首先分析了公司购并的概念及法律特征，认为公司购并系公司收购与兼并（Acquisition and Merger）的总称。其法律特征通过对公司购并的法律含义、概念的分析可以看出，公司购并是一种公司产权有偿转让的民事法律行为，其实质是公司之间的控制与反控制。作为一种特殊的民事法律行为，公司购并除了具有一般民事法律行为的一般特征（例如：主体法律地位平等、意思表示真实、行为的内容和形式合法等）外，还具有如下法律特征：（一）公司购并的主体一般只能是公司；（二）公司购并的客体是目标公司的财产所有权或者经营权控制权；（三）公司购并形态多元化；（四）公司购并中所产生的法律关系复杂性。二、其次分析了英美法系和大陆法系有关公司购并立法的特点：（一）以反垄断为公司购并立法的核心和首要任务；（二）保护中小股东和债权人；（三）实体法和程序法相结合。三、再次阐明了我国公司购并的立法现状，为了规范公司购并行为，国家先后制定了一系列的相关法律、法规和规章。然而，上述有关公司购并立法与我国公司购并实践对立法的要求相比，仍有相当差距，主要体现以下几个方面：（一）公司购并立法层次低。现行的公司购并立法大多是国务院及其所属部委颁布的《条例》、《办法》、《通知》等行政法规和规章，全国人大及其常委会所制定的法律只占极小的比重。这就使得的这些法律、法规的权威性和普遍适用性大大降低。（二）公司购并立法缺乏系统性。由于改革之初在立法上遵循“成熟一个，制定一个”的原则而没有贯彻体系化的立法思想，导致我国现行许多法律显得散乱，不系统，在这方面，我国的公司购并立法显得尤为突出。（三）公司购并立法缺乏可操作性。例如，我国现行法律规定的强制要约，这项规定，在我国目前是不可能实现的。这主要是基以下二方面原因：一方面是强制要约的法定前提条件本身就极少可能被满足。另一方面，纵然发生了强制要约，那么收购也几乎是不可能成功的。（四）公司购并立法漏洞多。从西方各国立法来看，公司购并立法主要由两大支柱构成：反垄断法和公司收购法。前者以控制公司购并中产生的垄断为目的，后者则主要以对中小股东及债权人的保护为宗旨[10]。但在我国尚未制定专门的《反垄断法》，关于反垄断的规定只是零星见于个别的行政法规之中，而对公司购并行为所带来的垄断问题的规定更几乎是一片空白。四、最后根据我国公司购并立法现状，提出了应当制定一部全国统一的《公司购并基本法》作为我国公司购并立法体系的统率和核心。同时完善我国公司购并相关法律规定，应当注意同一法律体系的各方面的规定，必须统一、一致、协调，不能有冲突、矛盾之处。法律体系的建立，一是要快，这是因为我国公司购并实践发展的很快，立法已经严重滞后；二是要客观可行，建立我国公司购并法律体系只能也必须是从中国国情与实际情况出发。三是及时修改。没有任何一部法律即便是当初制定出来时是非常优秀的法律，是可以一成不变的。客观条件或基础发生了变化，相应的规范就应该及时做出调整。尤其是在现代社会，新事物、新情况完全是日新月异地出现、在发展，相应的法律规范也就应该及时地出现与修改，是符合客观实际要求的。那种过分强调法律的稳定性，强调只有在时机条件成熟时方可以制定出相应的法律的观念，只能使立法远远滞后于实际，而客观上使法律失去了相当一部分的作用，这正是建立公司购并体系化立法所应该给予充分注意的。
英文文摘 The action of company acquisition & merger (A & M) itself is a product occurred in a duration when the security market develops to a certain stage. However, no matter in view of technique or in view of legislation, the security market in China still remains in a growing stage. Legal provisions of A & M stipulated on laws and regulations look simple and rough, have less workability, and therefore, bring about difficulties in practical operation of A & M. Since A & M involves in the security law, company law, tax law, labor law, anti-monopolization law and many other laws, and the beneficial subjects are so complicated and diversified, A & M requires high performance of technicality and workability. Therefore, how to establish a set of fair and rational A & M legal system in view of legislation is really a problem worth careful study. Through a brief introduction to the fundamental theory of A & M, and based on the simplified investigation in the principle and conditions of A & M legislation in the Anglo-American Law System and the Continental Law System, and in consideration of defects and shortcomings in the legislation of A & M in China, this paper renders a suggestion on the establishment of systematized A & M legislation in China.I. First of all, this paper analyzes the concept and legal features of A & M. It is believed that the A & M is a general term referring to the acquisition and merger of companies. From the legal features revealed through the analysis of legal implications and concept of A & M, we know that the A & M is a civil legal action for paid transfer of the company''s property ownership, of which, the substantial problem is the control and anti-control between companies. As a special civil action, A & M has also the following legal features in addition to general features of normal civil actions (e.g. equal legal status of subjects, true expression of meaning, and content and forms of legal actions, etc.): (I) The subject of A & M shall only refer to companies in normal cases; (II) The object of A & M shall be the property ownership, or business operation power or control power of the target company; (III) The forms of A & M are diversified; (IV) The legal relations produced in the process of A & M are complicated.II. Secondly, this paper analyzes the legislative features of A & M in the Anglo-American Law System and the Continental Law System: (I) To take anti-monopolization as the core and main task for the legislation of A & M; (II) To protect medium and small shareholders and creditors; (III) to combine the substantive law and procedure law.III. Thirdly, the paper introduces the present situation of legislation for A & M in China. For the purpose of standardizing the action of A & M, China has formulated a series of related laws and regulations. However, compared with the A & M legislation mentioned above, there is still a long way to go for the legislation requirements of A & M in China. The gap shall be mainly found in the following aspects: (I) The legislative level of A & M is low. Most legislation of A &M are those Regulations, Methods, Notices, and other administrative regulations and disciplines issued by the state council and its subsidiary ministries and commissions, while the laws formulated by the National People''s Congress and its Standing Committee take up only small proportion. Therefore, the authority and universal adaptability of these laws and regulations are greatly reduced. (II) The A & M legislation lacks systematization. At the early stage of reforms, following the principle "to formulate laws and regulations one by one accordingly" in legislation, no systematized legislative conception is implemented, which causes disorders and dispersions in may existing laws and regulations in China. In this aspect, the A & M legislation in China looks more important. (III) The A & M legislation lacks workability. For instance, the enforced offer stipulated in the existing laws of our country cannot be realized in China today. This is caused by the two reasons as follow: one is that the legal prerequisites for the enforced offer can be seldom satisfied, and the other is that the acquisition cannot be successfully made even if the enforced offer become effective. (IV) There are many loopholes in A & M legislation. In view of legislation in Western Countries, the A & M legislation consists mainly of the following two parts: Anti-Monopolization Law, and Company Acquisition Law. The former aims at the monopolization occurring in the control of A & M, while the latter aims at the protection of medium and small shareholders and creditors. But so far the Anti-Monopolization Law has not yet been formulated in China, and therefore, the anti-monopolization provisions can only be fragmentally found in some individual administrative regulations, and almost nothing can be seen concerning the monopolization problems caused by the A & M actions.
索书号 3010660
主题词 公司购并立法思考
分类号 DF438.7
论文答辩日期 20010410
论文页码总数 43P
论文页码总数 ref23
文献语种 zh
记录来源 吉林大学
记录流水号 DA200205000055

馆藏信息： 馆藏号 索书号
吉林大学 3010660