法人依瑕疵决议所为行为之效力
徐银波法人依瑕疵决议所为行为之效力
Validity of Legal Persons' Civil Juristic Acts Based on Defective Resolutions
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：徐银波
单位：西南政法大学
中文关键词：瑕疵决议;决议无效;相对无效;增资纠纷
英文关键词：defective resolution; invalid resolution; relative invalidity; dispute over the increase of registered capital
中文摘要：
决议不成立、无效或被撤销，无法完全适用民法总则第157条关于法律行为无效之后果规定。民法总则第85条、第94条以及"公司法解释四"第6条设定的善意相对人保护规则，过于简单和武断，需区分决议主体、决议内容、瑕疵事由而类型化地认定法人依瑕疵决议所为行为之效力。在法人内部，瑕疵决议溯及无效，但需依裁量驳回制度认定后续决议之效力，并适用法律行为相对无效理念保护第三人利益。就外部行为，决议无效导致行为违法，应依民法总则第153条认定行为效力。决议不成立或被撤销，则仅在法律设有强制决议规则之前提下方才导致行为欠缺法定要件，从而影响外部行为效力。因不同强制决议规则所欲保护的成员利益不同、所涉第三人利益不同，需区分营利法人与非营利法人、交易行为与组织行为，认定此种情形下外部行为之效力。有别于交易行为的相对性、独立性，组织行为具有涉他性、持续性之特征，需设立特别的公司组织行为效力诉讼规则，方可解决这一组织法问题。
英文摘要：
Article 157 in the General Provisions of the Civil Law, which provides the consequence of void and revoked civil juristic acts, cannot be fully applied to civil juristic acts based on defective resolutions. The rules of protecting counterparties in good faith provided by Article 85 and Article 94 in General Provisions of the Civil Law and Article 6 in Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (IV) are too simplified and arbitrary. It is necessary to determine the validity of a legal person's subsequent acts by taking into consideration of the subject, content and defective factors of the resolutions. Within a legal person, defective resolutions are retroactively void, but the validity of subsequent resolutions should be determined according to the discretionary rule and the bona fide third party should be protected according to the principle of relative invalidity. With regard to external acts, if a void resolution results in an act's violation of mandatory provisions, the validity of the act should be governed by Article 153 in the General Provisions of the Civil Law. The invalidity or revocation of a resolution affects the validity of an external act only when it has led the act to lack of the legal requirement of authority by resolution. Since different compulsory rules on resolution protect different interests and involve different third parties, it is necessary to distinguish between for-profit and non-profit legal persons and between trading and organizational behaviors, in order to determine the validity of an external act. Different from relative and independent trading behaviors, corporate organizational behaviors are related to third parties and characterized by continuity, so it is necessary to establish special provisions on validity litigation for them.
全文阅读： 点击下载
