一人公司的立法演进与司法驱动  

On the Legislative Evolution and Judicial Drive ofOne-Member Company

作　　者：李欢[1] LI Huan

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学民商经济法学院

出　　处：《经贸法律评论》2023年第4期125-141,共17页Business and Economic Law Review

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“营商环境法治化的制度架构与实现研究”(项目批准号:20ZDA044);学习贯彻习近平法治思想博士研究生创新实践专项项目(项目批准号:X2021BSCX04)。

摘　　要：一人公司在我国的立法实践中围绕两条基线展开。第一条基线为理论静态,围绕公司社团理论的存与弃;第二条基线为实践动态,围绕一人公司投资者与债权人的利益制衡。由此产生修法的两条路线,坚持现行公司法的特别规范模式,立法规制实质一人公司,或者摒弃公司社团理论,不予一人公司特别义务,治理模式与普通公司无异。一人公司九成以上人格否认率表明,现行《公司法》的特别规范模式事实上剥夺(限制)了投资者有限责任,《公司法(修订草案一审稿)》选择后者具有合理性。具体表现在:对一人公司的设立限制,阻碍现实制度需求,违背公平竞争原则;法院在“法人格滥用推定”规则适用中,过度倚重“财产混同”的形式标准,忽视债权人利益受损的实质要件,实践中一人公司陷入难以“自证清白”的窘境。立法者认为,继续强化特别规范模式已无实际意义,解决问题的关键并非静态的形式立法,而应回归司法的实践理性。这符合本轮降低公司运营成本、增加制度选择、加强中小投资者权益保护的修法宗旨,与世界通行做法一致。但是,《公司法(修订草案二审稿)》又回归现行法的股东“自证清白”规则,这会将一审稿所做的努力付之阙如。毕竟,通过隔离股东财产鼓励社会创新,慎重揭开一人公司面纱,这是一人公司的制度初衷。The legislative practice of one-member company in China is around two baselines.The first baseline is theoretical static,which revolves around the preservation and abandonment of corporate community theory.The second baseline is the practical dynamic,which focuses on the balance of interests between investors and creditors of one-member companies.Therefore,there are two lines of law revision,namely,adhering to the special normative mode of the current company law,legislating and regulating the substantive one-member company,or abandoning corporate association theory,denying the special obligation of one-member company,and the governance mode is no different from that of ordinary companies.The personality denial rate of more than 90%in one-member companies indicates that the special normative mode actually deprives(limits)the limited liability of investors,and the choice of the latter in the First Draft Amendment to the Company Law is fully reasonable.The specific performance is as follows:the establishment restriction of one-member companies hinders the actual system demand,violates the principle of fair competition,and has been avoided by a large number of substantive one-member companies;in the application of the rule of“presumption of abuse of legal personality”,the court excessively relies on the formal standard of“property confusion”,ignores the result requirement that the interests of creditors are damaged,and deviates from the substantive purpose of the personality denial system.In practice,one-member companies fall into the dilemma that it is difficult to“prove their innocence”.The legislators believe that it is of no practical significance to continue to strengthen the special rules,and the key to solve the problem is not static formal legislation,but to return to the practical rationality of justice.This is in line with the purpose of revising the law to reduce the operating costs of companies,increase the choice of institutions and strengthen the protection of the rights and interests of sm

关 键 词：一人公司 公司法修订草案 法人格滥用推定 法人格否认制 

分 类 号：D922.291.91[政治法律—经济法学]