论资本不足适用公司人格否定制度

Piercing the Corporate Veil under Inadequate Capitalization

国内许多学者认为资本不足是适用法人人格否定的典型情形。但是,因为相关制度上的不完善,导致司法实践中存在很多混乱的地方。资本不足情况下的法人人格否定制度应该审慎适用,因为当法院决定否定法人人格时,法院将债权人的期待利益置于有限责任保护下的股东利益之上。结合美国判例法分析,笔者认为资本不足不是适用该制度的决定性因素,必须还伴随着股东欺诈或者公司与股东的人格混同等违法行为才能适用法人人格否定制度。

Many scholars consider inadequate capitalization to be the most important condition to pierce a corporate veil. However, there are many problems in judicial practice due to the lack of relevant institutions. When a court pierces the corporate veil, it places creditors＇ expectations ahead of insiders＇ interests in limited liability. So it should only happen in extreme circumstances. Although grossly inadequate capitalization is a factor in determining whether to pierce the veil, it is not dispositive. There should be either some aflqrmative fraud or wrongdoing by the shareholder, or a gross failure to follow the formalities of corporate existence, combined with undercapitalization, before the veil is pierced.