专题二：揭开法人面纱

专题二：揭开法人面纱2011年9月19日Review1公司与合伙企业的区别合伙，是指二人以上按照合伙协议，共同出资、共同经营、共享利益和共担风险的盈利性组织。合伙既可以是一种契约，也可以是一种企业，区分为民事合伙与商事合伙。合伙企业与公司的区别主要体现在：（1）成立的基础不同（2）法律地位不同（3）财产关系不同（4）人身关系不同（合伙企业是典型的人合企业，合伙人之间存在密切的人身依赖关系，合伙人的入伙、退伙须经全体合伙人一致同意。公司主要体现的是资合性的特征，公司的存续不受个别股东变动的影响。）（5）管理权利的行使不同（6）盈亏分配的法律规制不同（7）责任承担不同（8）融资的途径不同2下列关于公司分类的哪一表述是错误的？A．一人公司是典型的人合公司B．上市公司是典型的资合公司C．非上市股份公司是资合为主兼具人合性质的公司D．有限责任公司是以人合为主兼具资合性质的公司3下列所作的各种关于公司的分类，哪一种是以公司的信用基础为标准的分类？A.总公司与分公司B.母公司与子公司C.人合公司与资合公司D.封闭式公司与开放式公司公司法的学习框架总论部分特别是有限责任和独立法人人格揭开法人面纱公司的设立公司章程公司的权利能力公司的资本制度股东和股权公司治理结构董事、监事和高管人员的任职资格和义务公司融资：股票和债券公司财务会计公司的合并、分立、解散和清算一揭开法人面纱制度设立的初衷什么是揭开法人面纱？Liftingthecorporateveil揭开法人面纱制度的渊源Salomoncase为什么要揭开法人面纱？揭开法人面纱与股东有限责任和独立法人人格制度的碰撞我国2005年新公司法引入了揭开法人面纱制度第20条第3款：公司股东滥用公司法人独立地位和股东有限责任，逃避债务，严重损害公司债权人利益的，应当对公司债务承担连带责任。二揭开法人面纱的特征只对特定案件中公司的独立人格予以否认，而不是对该公司法人人格予以全面、彻底、永久的否认。该制度主要是为了保护公司债权人的利益，它在性质上属于民事责任，是私法上的责任。公司法人人格否认不是对公司法人人格独立制度的否认，而是对公司法人人格独立制度的维护和完善，是对公司与债权人之间利益失衡的一种事后救济。公司法人人格否认的适用条件主体要件该制度适用的对象必须是具体的双方当事人，一是滥用公司人格的股东，二是因公司法人人格滥用而受到损害，并有权提起诉讼的债权人。行为要件适用的基本条件是存在股东滥用公司人格的事实和行为，如滥用公司人格回避合同义务、滥用公司人格造成公司形骸化等。结果要件该制度适用的一个重要条件是必须有损害的事实存在，即滥用行为造成了逃避债务、严重损害公司债权人利益的结果。CasesregardingliftingthecorporateveilunderEnglishcommonlawJonesvLipman[1962]1WLR832LittlewoodsMailOrderStoresLtdvInlandRevenueCommissioners[1969]1WLR1241CALittlewoodsMailOrderStoresLtdvInlandRevenueCommissioners[1969]1WLR1241CAFact:LittlewoodsMailOrderStoresLtd.carryonabigbusinessatJubileeHouseinOxfordStreet.In1947thebuildingwasboughtbyOddfellowsFriendlySocietyfor£605,000.TheOddfellowsletittoLittlewoodsona99-yearleaseatarentof£23,444ayear.ThatrentgavetheOddfellowsareturnofonly37/8thspercent.ontheiroutlay.Duringthenext11yearsthevalueofmoneygotmuchless.In1958thebuildingwasworthabout£2,000,000ifsoldwithvacantpossession.Andtherentobtainableonatenancyfromyeartoyeargrantedin1958wouldbe£60,000ayear.YetLittlewoodshadaleasewithanother88yearstogoatarentof£23,444.Suchbeingtheposition,in1958theadvisersofOddfellowsandLittlewoodscarriedthroughadealwhichwasdesignedtoconferaconsiderableadvantageonbothofthem.Itcametothis:theOddfellowstransferredthefreeholdinJubileeHousetotheForkManufacturingCo.Ltd.,whichwasawholly-ownedsubsidiaryofLittlewoods.TheForkCompanyletJubileeHousetotheOddfellowsfor22yearsand10daysatarentof£6ayear.TheOddfellowsgrantedanunderleasetoLittlewoodsfor22yearsatarentof£42,450ayear.TheresultwasthatLittlewoodsgaveuptheirleasefor88yearsatarentof£23,444andtookinsteadaleasefromtheOddfellowsfor22yearsat£42,450:and,inaddition,Littlewoods,throughtheirwholly-ownedsubsidiary,theForkManufacturingCo.Ltd.,attheendofthe22years,wouldhavetheentirefreeholdinhandinpossession.InreturntheOddfellowsreceivedarentof£42,450for22yearsandthenlostallinterestinthepremises.ThesignificanceofthiscaseKeyissues:Thedealwasdesignedtoadvantagebothinthisway:ontheonehandOddfellowswouldreceivearentof£42,450ayearfor22years,whichwouldbeclearoftaxastheywereacharity.Ontheotherhand,Littlewoodswouldclaimtodeductthefullrentof£42,450fromtheirprofitsinsteadofthesmallersumof£23,444.Sotheywouldescapealotoftax.Thedealwouldbetotheadvantageofbothsides,attheexpenseoftherevenue.Thepaymentforfixedassetscouldnotbedeductedfromincome.Rentalcostsweredeductiblefromincome.Transactions:Leaseback£6Fork(whollyownedsubsidiary)OddfellowsTransferoffreeholdUnderlease£42,450LittlewoodsThejudgedeclinedtotreatthesubsidiaryForkasaseparatelegalentityanditwasnotentitledtodeducttheextra£19,006incomputingtheirprofits.FraudulenttradingInsolvencyAct213:Fraudulenttrading(civilliability)(1)Ifinthecourseofthewindingupofacompanyitappearsthatanybusinessofthecompanyhasbeencarriedonwithintenttodefraudcreditorsofthecompanyorcreditorsofanyotherperson,orforanyfraudulentpurpose,thefollowinghaseffect.(2)Thecourt,ontheapplicationoftheliquidatormaydeclarethatanypersonswhowereknowinglypartiestothecarryingonofthebusinessinthemannerabove-mentionedaretobeliabletomakesuchcontributions(ifany)tothecompany'sassetsasthecourtthinksproper.CompaniesAct2006993:Offenceoffraudulenttrading(criminaloffence)(1)Ifanybusinessofacompanyiscarriedonwithintenttodefraudcreditorsofthecompanyorcreditorsofanyotherperson,orforanyfraudulentpurpose,everypersonwhoisknowinglyapartytothecarryingonofthebusinessinthatmannercommitsanoffence.(2)Thisapplieswhetherornotthecompanyhasbeen,orisinthecourseofbeing,woundup.(3)Apersonguiltyofanoffenceunderthissectionisliable–(a)onconvictiononindictment,toimprisonmentforatermnotexceedingtenyearsorafine(orboth);(b)onsummaryconviction–(i)inEnglandandWales,toimprisonmentforatermnotexceedingtwelvemonthsorafinenotexceedingthestatutorymaximum(orboth);(ii)inScotlandorNorthernIreland,toimprisonmentforatermnotexceedingsixmonthsorafinenotexceedingthestatutorymaximum(orboth).RvGrantham[1984]QB675Whatiswrongfultradinganditskeypoints?Ifdirectorskneworoughttohaveconcludedthattherewasnoreasonableprospectofcompanyavoidinggoingintoinsolventliquidation,thedirectorsshalltakeeverymeasuretomitigatethepotentiallosstothecompany’screditors.Scopeofapplication:dejure/defactodirectorandshadow