摘要
对《公司法》第16条的理解和适用历来纷争不止,根源在于将其视为“公司担保”的规定,并以之作为公司担保合同效力的评判依据。为正本清源,本文回归《公司法》自身的性质与功能,追朔公司法本来的立法目的,认为公司法主要体现为管理法性质,是关于公司治理中内部权力安排与分配的规范;《公司法》第16条是关于“公司担保决议机制”的规定,其所要解决的问题是公司对外提供担保的权力归属与行使的正当性与程序性要求。有鉴于此,在处理违反《公司法》第16条的法律后果时,应遵循“两步走规则”:第一步自然应依据《公司法》的治理规则和救济措施判定担保决议自身的效力和责任,包括因公司担保决议实质和程序违法、违规和违章而导入《公司法》第22条的适用。在对公司决议形成了确定性司法裁决后再启动第二步,考察其对公司担保合同的效力影响。当公司担保决议经司法裁判为无效或被撤销后,由此牵连出《合同法》《担保法》的介入和适用,担保合同可能发生无效的后果。本文坚持的原则是,公司有权机构做出的担保决议非经司法裁判为无效或被撤销,不能以违反《公司法》第16条作为判定担保合同效力的直接依据,《合同法》《担保法》不能“穿透”《公司法》第16条径行决定担保合同的效力。
The root cause as to why the understanding and application of Article 16 of the Company Law has always been disputed is that the article is regarded as a provision on“corporate guarantee”and is further adopted as the basis for evaluating and judging the validity of a corporate guarantee contract.In order to radically clarify this debate,this paper holds that the Company Law mainly gives expression to the nature of management law and is the norms concerning the setup and distribution of internal power in corporate governance,after refocusing the nature and function of the Company Law itself and tracing the original legislative purposes of the law.Article 16 of the Company Law is a clause about the“Resolution Mechanism for Corporate Guarantee”,which is designed to provide the legitimacy and procedural requirements with respect to the ownership and the exercise of the power to provide the guarantee to a third party by a company.In view of this,a“two-step”rule should be followed in dealing with the legal consequences of a violation of Article 16 of the Company Law.More specifically,the first step is to judge the effectiveness and responsibility of the guarantee resolution itself based on the governance rules and remedy measures of the Company Law including the application of Article 22 of the Company Law due to the substantial and procedural violations of the laws,regulations or corporate constitution.After a definitive judicial decision has been made on the corporate resolution,the second step is initiated to examine its impact on the effectiveness of the corresponding corporate guarantee contract.It involves the intervention and application of the Contract Law and the Guarantee Law,and the corresponding guarantee contract may suffer from the consequence of becoming invalid when the corporate guarantee resolution is invalidated or revoked by a judicial judgment.The principle adhered to this article is that the guarantee resolution made by a duly authorized organization is valid unless it has been judged
作者
施天涛
SHI Tian-tao(Law School,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China)
出处
《现代法学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2019年第3期111-126,共16页
Modern Law Science
关键词
《公司法》第16条
公司法的性质与功能
目的解释
司法适用
“两步走规则”
Article 16 of the Company Law
nature and function of the Company Law
teleological interpretation
judicial application
“two-step”rule
