公司法语境下决议与协议之界分

The Demarcation between Resolution and Contract in Corporate Law

司法实践存在协议"杀死"决议的现象。协议在我国公司治理当中运用甚广,然而,无论是放松管制,还是保障股东权益,又或是维护公司人合性,都难以成为协议"杀死"决议的正当理由。继而,无论是旨在加强收购监管的一致行动(协议)制度,还是意在确认行为效力的表决权拘束协议,察其本质都无法得出强制履行协议的结论。进而,通过明确公司程式在公司法上的价值,也能进一步厘清公司法语境下协议与决议的界分。当公司法之制度供给显著少于合同法,且决议制度本身还存在诸多不足时,协议极易"杀死"决议。要阻却这种伤害,公司法需要构建特殊的协议制度;同时,决议制度也需要在目的、原则、内容、程序、效力及责任等方面进行系统性修复。

The contract"killed"the resolution in judicial practice. In China,the contracts are widely used in corporate governance. However,several aspects,such as deregulation,protection of shareholders’ interests,and maintenance of corporate affinity,cannot become the reasons for contract to "kill"the resolution. Then,it is not appropriate to confuse "acting in concert"with "voting agreement". The former is aimed at strengthening the takeover supervision,and the latter is intended to confirm the behavior effect. Neither cannot come to the conclusion of enforcement of the contract. Thus,it is conducive to understand the value of corporate formality,and clarify the boundary between the contract and resolution. The contract is apt to "kill"the resolution when the supply of corporation law is less than that of contract law,and the resolution rules is deficient. In order to prevent damage,it is necessary to set special contract rules in corporation law,meanwhile,it needs to revise the resolution rules in the aspects of purpose,principle,content,procedure,effect and accountability.