摘要
董事注意义务制度虽然在我国立法和实践层面都有所尝试,但尚不完善。我国需要明确注意义务在董事义务体系中的独立地位,以确保其发展不受其他因素的影响。我国应细分式地阐明注意义务中注意、勤勉及能力等方面的具体要求,以丰富其内涵。立法应采用“董事对公司负有注意、勤勉和能力的义务,必须以审慎普通人的标准在类似决策条件下充分地运用自身能力和经验来履行注意、勤勉和能力义务”的表述来明确董事注意义务的具体内容。董事注意义务标准的建立应采行为标准和司法判定标准一致的立法模式以适应我国国情。建立以被告举证为核心的法定商业判断规则,被告应举证证明没有违反法定商业判断规则的要件,比如信息充分和不存在恶意,而不是被告举证证明所做的商业决策没有违反注意义务。
China has established her director s duty of care mechanism,but it is not perfect.The Chinese practice and the lessons and experiences of common law jurisdictions could be excellent reference points for establishing the standard.A valid duty of care standard could be designed appropriately based on a principle that can protect management s entrepreneurship and corporation and investors interest.To be more specific,first,the director s duty of care should be clarified as a singular duty to isolate negative impacts from other factors.Second,Chinese law needs to articulate the specifications of the duty and break the generic duty down to more detailed but inseparable sub-duties:the duty of care,the duty of diligence,and the duty of skills.While introducing the ordinary prudent person as the primary duty standard,the decision circumstances should also be factored in.Third,Chinese circumstances and judicial realities justify the unification of the standard of review and the standard of conduct.Following an American bifurcated standard should not help construct a better director s duty of care mechanism in China.
出处
《财经法学》
CSSCI
2021年第6期48-66,共19页
Law and Economy
关键词
公司法
注意义务
普通法
义务标准
corporate law
duty of care
standard of care
common law
