论公司章程之“全体股东一致同意条款”的法律效力  

On Validity of the Unanimity Provisions of All Shareholders in the Articles of Association

作　　者：王建文[1] 孙清白 Wang Jianwen;Sun Qingbai

机构地区：[1]南京航空航天大学人文与社会科学学院,江苏南京211106

出　　处：《法学杂志》2018年第12期56-65,共10页Law Science Magazine

基　　金：2014年国家社会科学基金项目"公司章程防御性条款法律效力研究"(项目编号:14BFX077)的阶段性研究成果

摘　　要：为弥补"资本多数决"适用的缺陷,近年来多有通过公司章程约定股东会决议须经"全体股东一致同意"的案例出现。实践中,全体股东一致同意条款又有概括型和列举型两种表现形式。当前司法实务在认定该类条款的法律效力上分歧较大,肯定或否定该类条款法律效力的论证均不够深入且未结合全体股东一致同意条款的两种表现形式展开。通过对《公司法》有关条文及相关公司法理论的分析可以发现,列举型全体股东一致同意条款在非公众公司章程中通常具有法律效力,概括型全体股东一致同意条款在非公众公司章程中仅具有个案适用的可能性。由于公众公司股东人数较多、股东变动频繁、股东之间缺乏人合性,全体股东一致同意条款在公众公司中不具有可适用性。In order to make up the shortage of majority decision based on capital,some companies have adopted unanimity provisions of all shareholders in the articles of association over the recent years. Unanimity provisions of all shareholders can be divided into two forms: general unanimity provisions of all shareholders and enumerative unanimity provisions of all shareholders. Judicial decisions have divergence on whether these provisions are legal or not and the judicial arguments have nothing to do with the two forms of these provisions. Through the analysis of relevant clauses and theories of Chinese Company Law,a conclusion can be made that enumerative unanimity provisions of all shareholders are usually valid while general unanimity provisions of all shareholders can only be used individually in the articles of association of non-public companies. Since public companies usually have more shareholders and these shareholders lack personal reliance,unanimity provisions of all shareholders cannot be used in the articles of association of public companies.

关 键 词：一致同意 资本多数决 公司章程 公众公司 非公众公司 

分 类 号：D922.291.91[政治法律—经济法学]