论文部分内容阅读
我国引入优先股意味着我国公司法类别股制度的确立。类别股与普通股之问存在利益冲突,前者的类别权容易受到普通股股东机会主义行为的侵害,类别表决权对优先股保护具有重要价值。类别表决权实质是对公司行为的类别否决权,类别否决范围过宽将妨碍公司行为自由,因此应对类别股保护与公司行为自由进行衡平。效率价值优位的公司法应优先保护公司行为自由,类别表决权适用范围应根据此价值判断合理确定。文中对类别表决权适用范围如何确定从法理和比较法两个方面进行分析论证。基于类别表决权上述一般原理,文中对我国证监会《优先股试点管理办法》中优先股的类别表决权进行评述,认为该办法过分扩大了强制类别表决事项,妨碍了公司行为自由和适应市场的灵活性,过分侵占了公司内部治理的空间。
The introduction of preference shares in our country means that the establishment of the system of corporate law class shares in our country. There is a conflict of interest between the class of shares and the common stock. The former’s class power is easily infringed by the opportunistic behavior of common stock shareholders. The voting power of class has important value for the protection of preferred stock. Category Voting power is the category of corporate veto rights, class veto broad limits will hinder the freedom of company behavior, and therefore should be protected class shares and corporate freedom to balance. The company law of the superiority of efficiency should give priority to the protection of the company’s freedom of conduct. The scope of application of the category voting right should be reasonably determined based on this value judgment. How to determine the scope of the application of the category of voting rights in the article from the legal and comparative analysis of the two aspects of argument. Based on the above general principles of category voting rights, the article reviews the class voting rights of preference shares in the Measures for the Administration of Pilot Shares of Preference Shares in China Securities Regulatory Commission, and considers that this measure unduly enlarges mandatory category voting matters, hindering the freedom of company behavior and market flexibility , Over-occupy the company’s internal governance space.