章程限定股东表决权代理人资格效力问题探讨

On Legal Validity of the Limitation on Agent Qualification of Shareholders' Voting Right by the Articles of Association——From the Perspective of Japanese Judicatory Cases Analysis

行使股东表决权的代理人仅限于本公司股东的公司章程条款是否有效?日本神户地方裁判所尼崎支所与直江津海陆运送事件的判决大相径庭。学界绝对有效说欠妥当,部分效力说缺乏逻辑,绝对无效说过于片面。小规模封闭公司的章程应禁止非股东代理权行使,中大型开放公司章程有条件限制股东代理权行使,司法实践中综合考量股东行使表决权的机会,确保股东大会的权能。

Is the company＇s article that the agent of exercising shareholders＇ voting right only limits to the shareholder of the company effective？ Japan Kobe Nizaki Shisyo＇s judgment is far different from that of the Zhijiangjin event of carriage by land and sea.Academic circles＇ absolute validity theory is not proper,partial validity theory is lack of logic and the absolute no-validity theory is unilateral.Small-sized closed companies should forbid the exercising of the agency of non-shareholders＇ voting right,while the medium-sized open company should give conditional limitation on agent qualification of shareholders＇ voting right.So,in judicial practice,a thoughtful consideration should be given to the opportunities of the shareholders＇ voting right,so as to assure the power of general meeting of shareholders.