語系: 繁體中文
說明(常見問題)
圖資館首頁
登入
切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

股東提案權之研究 = A Study On Shareholder Pr...
~
國立高雄大學法律學系碩士班

 

  • 股東提案權之研究 = A Study On Shareholder Proposal Rights
  • 紀錄類型: 書目-語言資料,印刷品 : 單行本
    並列題名: A Study On Shareholder Proposal Rights
    作者: 李美金,
    其他團體作者: 國立高雄大學
    出版地: [高雄市]
    出版者: 撰者;
    出版年: 2012[民101]
    面頁冊數: 158面圖，表格 : 30公分;
    標題: 股東會權限
    標題: Shareholders' Permission
    電子資源: http://handle.ncl.edu.tw/11296/ndltd/46560376023600206841
    附註: 參考書目：面124-147
    附註: 104年10月31日公開
    摘要註: 我國於民國90年修正公司法202條之規定，導致股東會所得決議之事項有限。因此，在強化公司民主方面，於94年公司法修法時，乃參酌外國立法例而增定股東提案權之制度，增訂第172條之1、第192條之1及第216條之1關於股東提案權規定，以響應「股東行動主義」之潮流趨勢，來發揮股東提案制度之溝通、資訊蒐集、強迫公司公開資訊、強制公司公正營運及促進公益之功能。並於同年12月修正股東會議事手冊應記載事項內容已配合之。公司法將股東提案權範圍擴及董監候選人之提名權，以強化股東對公司經營之監督及股東提案權之價值，論及資訊透明促進股東與公司間之溝通，使公司之氣流通暢，經營更加透明化等議題。而我國公司法於94年引進股東提案權制度，僅有第172條之1之規定，其內容甚為貧乏，適用上難免有疑義，並就股東提案權範圍復有規定以「股東會得決議之事項」，是其與「股東不得以臨時動議提出」之界線又為何。本文將藉由經濟部商業司就公司法第172條之1適用上所作之解釋提出問題，且藉由美國、日本之立法例、案例等介紹，就公司治理及股東行動主義概念之論述，繼之就股東提案制度之立法沿革以說明股東提案制度之緣起，及我國股東提案權制度簡介。而股東提案之實質審查，無非係以股東會權限為範圍，故就董事會與股東會權限分配之模型及我國權限分配之立場加以說明。以我國股東提案權之法條文意即立法理由論述股東提案權範圍之困境即必須就股東會與董事會權限分配及臨時動議範圍之核心問題加以釐清，換言之，三者之關係互為表裡牽一法而動全身，其思辯過程頗為繁複，然股東影響公司之手段並非在「提案」而係「決議」，也就是制度本身之形式意義大於實質意義 Article 202 of the Corporation Law revised in 2001 in our country leads to the limit of the resolution concluded by the meeting of shareholders. As a result, in terms of the consolidation of corporate democracy, the system of shareholder proposal rights was added with reference to foreign legislations during the amendment of the Corporation Law in 2005, so that Clause 1 of Article 172, Clause 1 of Article 192 and Clause 1 of Article 216 regarding shareholder proposal rights were supplemented, to play a role in communication, information collection in terms of the system of the shareholder proposal rights on the trends of “shareholder behaviorism”. Besides, corporations have been required to make data public, conduct just operations and promote public affairs. In December of the same year, the matters that needed to be recorded in the revised manual of shareholders were incorporated with the above-mentioned functions. Corporation Law broadens the scope of the shareholder proposal right to the nomination of director and supervisor candidates to encompass the shareholders’ right to supervision of the business operations and to enhance the value of shareholder proposal rights. Meanwhile, information transparency is also under discussion to promote the communication between shareholders and the corporation, so that the corporation will have a more harmonious atmosphere and the operation will be more transparent and so forth.The Corporation Law in our country introduced the system of shareholder proposal rights in 2005 with Clause 1 of Article 172 as the only provision. However, there will be inevitable ambiguities in the application of the provision due to its insufficient content. The “matters regarding the resolutions of shareholder meeting” have been provided. What’s the difference between the “matters regarding the resolution of shareholder meeting” and “shareholders shall not make proposals in the name of temporary motion”? The paper will propose questions in terms of the interpretation of the application of Clause 1, Article 172 of the Corporation Law conducted by the Business Department of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, conduct an overview of the corporate governance and shareholder behaviorism based on the legislation cases in the United States and Japan, and further make an introduction of the origin of the shareholder proposal system and the system of the shareholder proposal rights in our country in terms of the reform on the shareholder proposal system. The substantive examination of the shareholder proposals takes into consideration the limitations on the authority of the shareholders. Therefore, the paper makes an explanation of the model of approval of authority of the Board of Directors and shareholders as well as our position regarding the approval of authority in our country. The clause interpretations of the shareholder proposal rights in our country i.e. reasons for the creation of the law are applied to have a discussion of the predicament of the shareholder proposal approval, namely it’s of necessity to conduct a strict regulation on the core issues related to the approval of authority of the Board of Directors and shareholders as well as the scope covered by temporary motion. In another word, the interrelation among the above three factors involve an integral and complicated speculation process. However, measures taken by shareholders to influence the corporation lie in the resolution rather than the proposal, which means that the formal meaning of a system itself is more important than the substantive meaning.
評論
Export
取書館別
 
 
變更密碼
登入