法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 臨時動議減資的法律問題-兼論公司法第 172 條第 5 項規定法制之檢討(Legal Issue of Reduction in Capital as Extemporary Motion-Review of Legal System of Article 172 Paragraph 5 of the Company Act of Taiwan)
編著譯者: 楊君仁
出版日期: 2015.04
刊登出處: 台灣/法學叢刊第 60 卷 第 2 期 /1-37 頁
頁  數: 37 點閱次數: 1809
下載點數: 148 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 法學叢刊雜誌社
關 鍵 詞: 召集程序通知及公告召集事由減資變更章程臨時動議股東會法律漏洞撤銷決議之訴重要性原則
中文摘要: 公司實務常見公司利用股東會臨時動議的方式通過減資案,其主要論據乃是公司法第 172 條第 5 項之規定,減資非屬召集事由應明列事項,故得以臨時動議提出。問題是,如此解釋適用該法條,除了明顯誤解法條文義外,亦屬對拉丁法諺「省略規定之事項,應為有意省略」、「明示其一,排除其他」之誤用,完全不合現行公司法制與法理。而且,公司法第 172 條第 5 項之應載明於股東會召集事由之列舉規定,其違反者股東會之決議得撤銷,問題是,此法律效果既等同於違反同法第 172 條第 4 項之規定,那又何必具體列明,其法制上之考量為何?或者是應從通知公告載明召集事由之整體公司法制根本性地闡明,實有檢討之必要。
英文關鍵詞: convening procedurenoticesubjects of a shareholders’ meetingshareholders’ meetingalteration of the Articles of Incorporationreduction in capitalextemporary motionlegal loopholeannulment of resolutionRelevanztheorie
英文摘要: It happens often in our company practices that companies carry out reduction in capital by way of an extemporary motion. Its main argument is that the subject of capital reduction is not itemized in the provisions of Section 172, Paragraph 5 of the Company Act Taiwan and therefore shall be brought up as extemporary motions. The problem is that such interpretation of the applicable law, obviously misunderstandding not only law provisions, but also the essence of Latin legal maxim “Casus omissus pro omisso habendus est”, “Expressio unius est exclusion alterius”. Moreover, the provisions in Article 172 paragraph 5 of the Act elaborate the discussion in the shareholders’ meeting should be enumerated. Otherwise, the resolutions may be revoked. The fundamental problem is that this is a violation of the legal effect of Article 172 paragraph 4 of the Act. There are legal considerations of specifically listing discussion issues. We are going to review the legal system fundamentally in this article.
目  次: 壹、前言
貳、減資為變更章程事項者,當然不得以臨時動議提出
參、公司法第 172 條第 5 項規定法制之檢討
肆、違反載明減資召集事由之法律效果
伍、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
相關論著:
返回功能列