浅议股东表决权信托——以中小股东保护为中心

上海交通大学硕士学位论文浅议股东表决权信托——以中小股东保护为中心姓名：彭筱璇申请学位级别：硕士专业：民商法指导教师：韩长印200712222005ShanghaiJiaotongUniversityMasterDegreeTheoryAbstractIADISSCUSSIONONTHESYSTEMOFVOTINGTRUSTABSTRACTConstantexperienceshowsusthateverymaninvestedwithpowerisapttoabuseit.Inthelastfewyears,thedevelopmentofcompanyhasalreadybeenperplexeddeeplybyseriousphenomena—majorityshareholdersabusingtheholdingpositionagainstinterestsofminorityshareholderslegitimate,andtheinfringementofrightsofminorityshareholders.Protectingthelegalrightandinterestsofminorityshareholdershasbeenanissueintheacademiccircles.Infact,thekeyofmajorityshareholdersagainstminorityshareholdersistocontrolthecompany.Thevotingrightisthetooloffightingthecompanycontrolamongshareholders.Itisalsotheefficientwaytoprotecttherightsandinterestsofminorityshareholders.Althoughthecooperationlawhasmanyregulativeefficiencyintheprotectionoftheminorityshareholdersinthejoint-stockcompany,it’snottooenough.Especially,asanefficientwayofprotectingminorityshareholders,votingtrustisnotanexpressprovisioninourcountry’slaw.ThesystemofvotingtrustoriginatedfromtheUnitedStatedwhichhasadevelopedcompanysystem.IntheoperationofAmericancompanies,thesystemofvotingtrustplaysauniquerole,suchasensuringstabilityandcontinuityofcompanygovernance,safeguardingtheinterestsofcreditorsandassistingtherestructuringofthecompany,inparticular,ithasoperationsignificanceforprotectingtherightsandinterestsofminorityshareholders.So,weshouldstrengthenprotectingofexercisingvotingtrusttorealizethefunctionofvotingtrust,wecanchoosevotingtrustasameanstorealizethispurpose.However,inourcountry,legalresearchinsuchareaisnotsomuchasexpected,thelawofcorporationandthetrustlawhavenotsuchregulation.Therefore,thisarticlefirstlyintroducestheelementarytheoryofvotingtrust,ShanghaiJiaotongUniversityMasterDegreeTheoryAbstractIIexpoundingorigin,themeaning,thecharacteristic,theessenceofvotingtrustandsoon.Atthesametime,throughthecomparativestudybetweenthesystemofvotingandthecompanylawandotherrelatedfields,thisarticleclearsthelinksandthedistinctionsbetweenthesystemofvotingtrustandthelegalsystemrelated.Secondlytheauthorstudiesthefunctionsofthesystemofvotingtrustandthefeasibilityofintroduction.Thirdlythearticlestudiestheproceduresandrelatedrequirementsofthesystemofvotingtrust,especially,focusingonthestudyofrightsandobligationsbetweenthepartiesofthetrustvote.Finally,Aimattheproperlimitationofthevotingtrust,itgivessomejuristiccountermeasure.KEYWORDS:votingrights,votingtrust,minorityshareholders,functions2008130200813020081301120051200021721864BrownV.PacificMailSteamshipCompany218671868AtlanticandGreatWesternRailroadCo.3187341882.T.C.StandardOilTrust5243[]18166169[]20033584[]Votingtrust437[]200336036154099318881885188761890ShepangVotingTrustCases(PublicPolicy)71910CamegieTrustCo.V.SecurityLifeInsuranceCo.891900101918MauriceWormserColombiaLawReview6[]138[]20033597[]20033598111Virginia168,S.E412[]20033609StephenM.Bainbridge,CorporationLawandEconomics,NewYork,FoundationPress2002.P.800.2005110JohnJ.Sullivan,AmericanCorporations,1910,P.150.2000290411121928UniformBusinessCorporationAct.298291962504113141974GM15161711MauriceWormser,TheLegalityofCorporateVotingTrustandPoolingAgreement.1918,18Col.,L,Rev123.200615912[]Votingtrust437[]200336036113[]43585920062414200524815200711161620052491752001)177220021023()5181972018200524925019()200346120[]VotingTrust37[]20033603616212119961917101012831993652542212342322200415723[].W.19992279199534.1725.896%25112ST324200051617233.3%15530%271.28310.372524ST212003121325200541411020021.82H308224.5%9.9%20%27%30.56%20%2620%26200345111272827199419228200323122005199313106292920043741410101530()311151052030101010302001323333311983311632()322005187173312343320053128129181231342513534[]20032935199415319229343912203421123222324[1]198330-35[2]1994149-156[3]1994190-192[4]1996185-195[5]1997335-347[6][].W.1999223-228[7]2000210-300[8]2001322-324[9]2001124-137[10]200177-83[11]20011-37[12]200277-96[13]()2003450-475[14]2003340-365[15]21-24[16]200417-139[17]2004155-380[18]200543-258[19]2005235-276[20]2006140-172[21]()2006135-245[22]JohnAntonLeavitt,theVotingTrust,ColumbiaUniversityPress,1941p.1[23][]20036-20[24]19981108-112[25]199825598-640[26]2001151-55[27]2002175-77[28]ST2120031213[29]2003450-52[30]20037126-127[31]2003450-52[32]2004557-59[33]2004584-87[34]20054141-143[35]2005183-90[36]20056105-106[37]20068124416-422[38]2006423-26[39]2006468-73[40]20071112-117[41]20071126-13126浅议股东表决权信托——以中小股东保护为中心作者：彭筱璇学位授予单位：上海交通大学相似文献(10条)1.学位论文朱成论股份公司控制股东表决权的制约2007表决权是股东权利体系中一项至关重要的权利，控制股东也往往基于表决权的优势控制公司，进而滥用其控制权损坏公司和中小股东权益。本文从制约控制股东权力滥用和保护中小股东利益的角度出发，致力于构建一套有效制约控制股东表决权行使的机制。本文共五章，第一章论述制约控制股东表决权的法理基础，后四章详细阐述制约控制股东表决权的四条途径。由于“一股一表决权”和“资本多数决”的原则行使表决时在不同程度出现制度“失灵”，使小股东的权利无法得到有效保护，特别是目前我国股权的高度集中使股东表决权被滥用的现实危险性大大增加，因此迫切需要对“一股一表决权”和“资本多数决”原则进行合理的限制。股东平等原则和控制股东诚信义务是制约控制股东表决权的正当性所在。控制股东表决权制约的路径之一是股东表决机制的完善，包括表决权行使方法的完善和股东大会出席定足数的完善。为保障广大中小股东的利益，遏制控制股东表决权的滥用，我国需要引入股东大会通讯表决和网络通讯表决制度制度；为了使股东大会的决议更具有代表性，更符合多数股东的利益，特别是广大中小股东的利益，公司法需规定股东大会出席定足数。控制股东表决权制约的路径之二是表决权行使方式的完善，包括股东表决权的代理、代理权征集