“未成立决议”适用探究——以法释[2017]16号第5条为切入点

Applicable Research of “Non-establishment Resolution”——Take “Article 5 of the Judicial Interpretation of Company Law(Ⅳ) ”As the Starting Point

最高人民法院公布《公司法司法解释（四）》，新增“决议不成立”情形。然在此之前，实务中已出现“决议不成立”的表述，囿于法律规制之阙如，存在适用法律及说理混乱、同案不同判等问题。未成立决议的认定和适用不能简单套用民事法律行为的判断标准，而应当注重其区别于无效、可撤销决议的特殊性；对于正式文件中删除的“伪造股东签名”并不当然致使决议不成立，在实务中仍有适用空间。“未成立决议”的适用更多是以程序瑕疵为基础，应当基于商事活动的特点，以《公司法司法解释（四）》第5条为中心，运用法律解释的方法辅之以先例，对其进行综合性考量。

The Supreme People＇s Court promulgated the ＂Judicial Interpretation of Company Law （IV）＂, newly added the case that ＂non - establishment resolution＂. However, prior to this practice, the expression ＂non - establishment resolution＂ has been emerged. As for the lack of legal regulation, there are some problems such as the disorders when applicable laws and explain the reasons, and the different sentences in the same case. The determination of＂ non establishment resolution＂ can not simply apply the judgment standard of civil legal act. Its application should pay attention to the particularity of distinguishing it from the invalid and revocable resolution. As for the ＂signature forgery ＂,it does not of course result in the resolution not being established, but there is still room for application in specific situations. The application of ＂non - establishment resolution＂ is based more on procedural flaws, and we should respect the characteristics of commercial activities. On the basis of Article 5 of the Judicial Interpretation of Company Law （IV）, we Should use the method of legal explanation as a precedent and make a comprehensive consideration of it.