摘要
长期以来,公司法上的组织变更没有被特别重视,法律有关合并分立及类型变更的条文简略,公司法上的组织类型转换形式单一、转换领域有限——立法仅认可有限公司与股份公司之间的双向变更,并未明确认同分公司、无限责任企业,甚至非企业法人与公司形态之间的转换。这是一种十分封闭的立法结构,未能将全部企业法以及组织法融通规整。事实上,基于政治改革的原因,政治实体与公司之间存在类型转换的可能;非营利组织甚至非法人企业与公司之间亦均存在转换可能。因此,应坚持"融通主义"的公司法改革观,为不同类型公司/组织的转换提供自由空间,以确保投资人营业自由权的实现。在公司法内部,现行立法关于公司组织类型转换的安排还存在重合并分立、轻类型变更的缺陷,立法未能区分不同公司/组织类型转换所遭遇的"利益平衡问题的特殊性",无论是对股东权益保护,还是对债权人利益的保护,均存在明显不足。因此,在规制哲学上,对公司/组织类型转换应采"一步法"的"直接变更"规制模式,不应采"注销+新设"的"两步法"规制模式。这不仅是基于对组织变动效率的追求,还涉及对债权人是否需要豁免清算及注销程序,以及对股东权益如何换算承继的考量。
For a long time,organization type conversion in Company Law has been ignored by many scholars,the provisions about merger,division and type conversion in Company Law are simple and crude.A unitary type of organization conversion in Company Law,a limited legislation in the area of organization type conversion thatonly recognizes two-way changes between limited company and joint stock company,which means legislation do not explicitly recognize the conversion between a branch company,an unlimited liability company,or even a conversion between unincorporated enterpriseand corporate legal entity.This is a very closed legislative structure that fails to integrate all types of Corporate Law and Organization Law.In fact,due to the reasons of political reform,there is a possibility of organizationtype conversion between political entities and companies,as well as the non-profit organization and the unincorporated enterprise.Therefore,we should adhere a perspective of"flexible reform"inthe innovation of Company Law,to provide flexible space for organization type conversion between different types of company,so as to ensure the realization of investor’s right to freedom business.Inside the Company Law,the present legislation remains some defects about the arrangement of company organization type conversion,such as emphasize company merger and division but neglect organization type conversion,the current legislation also fails to distinguish"the particularity of interest balance"between different types companies by the period of conversion,which is obviously deficient both in the protection of shareholders’interest and in the protection of creditors’interest.Consequently,under the regulation philosophy,the"one-step"regulation mode of"direct conversion"should be adopted,rather than the"two-step"regulation mode of"cancellation and establishment".This is not only based on the pursuit of efficiency valuein organizationtype conversion,but also involves the consideration of whether creditors need to be exempted from liquidation and cancellation procedures,and shareholders’equityhow toconvert andinherit.
出处
《法学评论》
CSSCI
北大核心
2021年第3期56-67,共12页
Law Review
关键词
公司
类型转换
变更
公司法
融通性
Company
Type Conversion
Changes
Company law
Flexibility
