对赌协议的效力及司法裁判路径  

On Legal Validity and Judgment Path of Valuation Adjustment Mechanism

作　　者：王东光[1] WANG Dongguang(Economic Law School,East China University of Political Science and Law,Shanghai 200042,China)

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学经济法学院,上海200042

出　　处：《现代法学》2023年第3期124-137,共14页Modern Law Science

摘　　要：对赌协议所涉权利是以股东身份为基础的股东权利,股东权利以法律及公司章程为渊源,不能通过公司与股东之间的协议加以设定,风险投资方不能以对赌协议为依据主张股东权利。因此,对赌协议纠纷司法裁判中的重点不是对赌协议的效力,而是投资方主张的权利是否有公司章程的基础。如果公司章程没有吸收对赌协议的内容,通常应视为公司与股东以公司章程修改了对赌协议的内容,对赌协议已失去效力;如果投资方反对未吸收对赌协议内容的章程修改,可以根据投资协议主张公司的违约责任。The rights involved in Valuation Adjustment Mechanism are the shareholder’s rights based on the identity of shareholder.The shareholder’s rights are derived from the company law and the company’s articles and can not be set through an agreement between company and shareholders.The venture capitalist cannot claim shareholder’s rights on the basis of Valuation Adjustment Mechanism.Therefore,the focus of judicial judgments on Valuation Adjustment Mechanism disputes is not on the effectiveness of the Valuation Adjustment Mechanism,the decisive factor is whether the rights claimed by the investor are based on the company’s articles.If the company’s articles do not incorporate the content of the Valuation Adjustment Mechanism,it should generally be considered that the company and its shareholders have modified the content of the Valuation Adjustment Mechanism with the company’s articles,and the Valuation Adjustment Mechanism has become invalid;if the investor objects to the amendment of the articles of association that do not absorb the content of the Valuation Adjustment Mechanism,the company’s liability for breach of contract can be claimed in accordance with the investment agreement.

关 键 词：对赌协议 估值调整 风险投资 股权投资 股东权 

分 类 号：DF59[政治法律—民商法学]