| dc.contributor | 法律系 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | 周振鋒 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | Chou, Cheng-Fong | |
| dc.date (日期) | 2014-12 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 4-Dec-2019 14:50:23 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 4-Dec-2019 14:50:23 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 4-Dec-2019 14:50:23 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/127706 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 公司法第 200 條（以下稱本條），董事執行業務，有重大損害公司之行為或違反法令或章程之重大事項，股東會未為決議將其解任時，得由持有已發行股份總數百分之三以上股份之股東，於股東會後三十日內，訴請法院裁判之。除依公司法第 199 條以股東會決議解任董事外，股東亦可提起解任訴訟請求法院解除不適任之董事。本條制訂目的係為避免股東會為董事或大股東把持，致無法為解任之決議，乃藉股東行使訴權保護公司及股東之利益。然解任董事涉及公司內部事務，故本條要求起訴前應先循公司內部機制解決（即於股東會提出與表決解任董事議案），倘公司自治功能不彰時（即董事有重大不當行為但股東會未能決議解任），司法才有介入干涉之必要。本條因具嚴格之起訴要件與實務見解另發展其他起訴要求，導致提起解任訴訟並不容易，實際案例相當少，使得本條原定功能發揮極為受限。本文擬以分析本條要件與相關實務見解之合理性出發，提出對本條規範或實務見解之建議，希冀能藉此回復本條原定功能。 | |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | Article 200 of Taiwan Company Act (Article 200) provides that, in case a director has, in the course of performing his duties, committed any act resulting in material damages to the company or in serious violation of applicable laws and/or regulations, but not removed by the shareholders’ meeting, the shareholder(s) holding 3 % or more of the total number of outstanding shares of the company may, within 30 days after that shareholders’ meeting, institute a lawsuit against the director for removal. The purpose of Article 200 is to protect the interests of the company and shareholders in a case where the disqualified directors or directors cannot be removed because the shareholders’ meeting is monopolized by the disqualified directors or their affiliated controlling shareholders. While shareholders’ meeting fails to remove disqualified directors due to the interference by controlling shareholders or directors, shareholders, on behalf of the company, can bring a lawsuit for a court order to remove such disqualified directors. The removal of directors is an internal affair in a company, and courts should not interfere with such matter unless the shareholders’ meeting cannot function well. However, in fact, this type of lawsuits can hardly be seen in practice because of some existing procedural hurdles required by law and judicial opinions. This article argues some of them have no reasonable grounds and should be amended or modified. In conclusion, this article will provide suggestions with respect to current provision of Article 200 and its future reform with the hope that the legal function can match the original intent. | |
| dc.format.extent | 130 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | text/html | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 華岡法粹, No.57, pp.101-125 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 公司法 ; 決議解任 ; 裁判解任 ; 少數股東 ; 股東訴訟 ; 公司治理 ; 股東會 ; 董事 ; 監察人 | |
| dc.title (題名) | 論公司法裁判解任之規範--以實務見解為討論中心 | |
| dc.title (題名) | Study on Removal of Directors by Court Order | |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | |
