善意义务是否需要作为受信义务的第三维构成?

Does the Duty of Good Faith Need to Be the Third Component of the Fiduciary Duty?

善意要求是公司法中最为尴尬的问题:它几乎一开始就被植入受信义务,但却一直被虚置不用,成为名副其实的摆设。在“商业判断规则”的庇护之下,公司管理者几乎无责任可言;在形式主义的遮掩之下,公司管理者可以轻易逃避责任。这样的法律规则与现代公司治理的要求格格不入,相距甚远。有鉴于此,有识之士认识到必须重新竖起受信义务中善意要求这面旗帜,并将善意要求落实为具体可执行的义务。受信义务在我国《公司法》中是一项远未得到足够重视的制度,它不仅是我国《公司法》的重大制度缺陷,更是我国公司治理需要完善的法律救济。本文针对这一目标假设检讨了比较法上的经验,探讨了善意要求的指导意义和善意义务的具体执行。

In Company Law,good faith is in the most awkward position.Though obligations of good faith seemed to be embedded in the fiduciary duty almost from the beginning,it has become a veritable ornament being left vacant.Sheltered by the business judgment rule,corporate managers can facilely get away with responsibilities after going through the motions.Such a legal rule is incompatible with the requirements of modern corporate governance.In that light,insightful people realize that good faith must be upheld and implemented into concrete and feasible rules.Relating to legal remedies for more sophisticated corporate governance,fiduciary duty has yet to receive due attention in Chinese Company Law,even constituting a major institutional defect.This article examines the guiding role and specific implementation of good faith by reviewing the comparative law experience.The author expects to draw the attention of our colleagues to continue to study this issue in depth.