摘要
《公司法》将直索责任的性质界定为"连带责任",但对其为何种连带责任却不甚明确。法院裁判各执一词,学界亦对此争论不休,形成直索责任性质迷局。迷局的根源在于我国早期公司法实践中系列法律文件对各种责任性质混用所造成的思维定式以及我国对民事责任的长期误读所带来的概念混淆。对直索责任制度的本源分析及对其滥觞之地美国的理论界与实务界关于直索责任性质态度的梳理后发现,直索责任作为一种利益平衡机制,并无限度,也无先后顺序,应当为共同连带责任。
Company law defines the nature of durchgriff liability as the 'joint and several liability',of which kind it doesn't make clearly.Therefore,court decisions are inconsistent and scholars' views are in conflict.The puzzle derives from the confusion of series of legal documents of earlier legislative activities on company law and the long-term misreading of civil liability.By analyzing the system origin of durchgriff liability and combing theories and practices in America,the paper concludes that as a balance mechanism for interests,durchgriff liability has no limit,no particular order,and is subject to the joint and several responsibility.
出处
《南京审计学院学报》
2013年第4期85-92,共8页
journal of nanjing audit university
基金
南京审计学院2010年度高层次引进人才项目(NSRC10025)
关键词
《公司法》
直索责任性质
补充责任
共同连带责任
无限责任
company law
the nature of durchgriff liability
supplementary liability
joint and several liability
unlimited liability
