有限公司股权对外转让行为的效力研究——以侵害股东优先购买权为视角  

Validity of Share Transfer in Limited Companies——Through Infringement of Shareholders’Preemption

作　　者：胡灵[1] 沈子程 HU Ling;SHEN Zi-cheng(School of law,Guizhou University,Guiyang 550025,China)

机构地区：[1]贵州大学法学院,贵州贵阳550025

出　　处：《榆林学院学报》2024年第3期50-56,共7页Journal of Yulin University

摘　　要：2023年《公司法》第84条就优先购买权作出规定,用以保护有限公司的人合性特征,但对侵害股东优先购买权具体情形仍未予言明,致使司法裁判和理论学说已有争议仍存在。亟待2023年《公司法》在其司法解释中对股权对外转让行为进行体系化完善。在股权转让行为方面,应采用区分原则明确股权转让行为系债权行为;在优先购买权性质认定方面,应采用公司组织法上的特殊权利说保障其他股东的顺位优势;在以侵害优先购买权主张股权转让合同无效时,应根据《民法典》规定分别对欺诈、通谋行为等情形的转让合同效力进行认定。Owing to the partnership of limited companies,Article 84 of Company Law establishes the shareholders’preemptive,but the Company Law has no rules to express the validity of the contract in this situation,leading to the argument between judge and theory.Through this time of establishment of Company Law,the contract’s validity between shareholders should be confirmed in judicial interpretation.In behavior of share transfer,the act of debt and the juristic act of real right to deal with share transfer disputes is very important.In confirmation of shareholders’preemptive,the view of right of the company organization should be adopted and this view can protect the superiority order.In the validity of contract and which rule should be adopted,the infringement of shareholders’preempti on is not the only one rule to confirm the validity.The Civil Law should be adopted to confirm the validity of contract.

关 键 词：股权对外转让 区分原则 特殊权利说 欺诈 通谋行为 

分 类 号：D922.291[政治法律—经济法学]