摘要
在美国针对董事的股东派生诉讼实践中,公司通常基于特别诉讼委员会的决定提出驳回诉讼的动议,法院对该动议进行审查后决定是否继续进行诉讼。法院在司法审查中对于商业判断规则适用的不同态度,以典型案例为代表形成了四种主流的司法审查标准,即Auerbach案适用商业判断规则的审查标准、Zapata案独立商业判断的审查标准、Miller案否定董事会任命的特别诉讼委员会的审查标准和Alford案全面实质的审查标准。美国股东派生诉讼中的庭前司法审查程序及司法审查标准,对我国的股东派生诉讼制度改革具有借鉴意义,即应赋予公司抗辩的权利,在庭审前增加前置性的司法审查程序,由法院在该程序中审查原告股东资格、诉前请求程序、公司利益受损事实和公司不起诉抗辩理由,在衡量了公司利益、股东利益和法律及公共利益之后,法院最终决定是否进入派生诉讼庭审程序,从而降低司法成本,平衡董事管理公司事务和股东维护公司利益的冲突,并有效防止滥诉。
In the United States,when shareholders file a derivative action against directors,corporations will typically challenge with a motion to dismiss based on the decision of the special litigation committee.The court thus has to review and decide whether the lawsuit should be continued.There are four major judicial scrutiny standards developed with regard to the application of the business judgment rule:full application of the business judgment rule in Auerbach case,application of the independent business judgment of the court in Zapata case,denial of the independence of the special litigation committee appointed by the board of directors composed of the defendant directors in Miller case,as well as the replacement hereof with a thorough substantive judicial review in Alfordcase.The pretrial judicial review procedure and the judicial review standards in shareholder derivative actions in the United States will have some implications to the perfection of the shareholder derivative action system in China.Judicial review procedure shall be introduced into the pretrial process,which requires the court to review,inter alia,the eligibility of the shareholder plaintiff,the demand requirement prior to the derivative suit,the harm to the corporation,and the reasons for the refusal of the management to pursue litigation.The court must strike a balance between two competing interests in deciding whether to proceed with the derivative suit:the interest of the shareholders and that of the corporation,law and the public interest.This will help reduce judicial costs and control the abuse of process in the balancing act between the directorial autonomy and accountability,and shareholdersright to maintain the interests of the corporation.
出处
《中外法学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2021年第4期1085-1102,共18页
Peking University Law Journal
基金
吉林大学基本科研业务费项目“公司诉讼中的疑难问题研究”(项目编号:2016QY027)阶段性研究成果。
关键词
股东派生诉讼
商业判断规则
特别诉讼委员会
司法审查程序
Shareholder Derivative Action
Business Judgment Rule
Special Litigation Committee
Judicial Review Procedure
