公司負責人失格與解任制度研究：比較美國與本國法制

Abstract

公司負責人（如董事、經理人）失格與解任制度之濫觴，係英國經過多年的法制改革，整合散落於各法規中有關於失格與解任規定所創制之Company Directors Disqualification Act（CDDA）。CDDA之立法目的在於透過失格宣告或解任公司負責人，達到保護「少數股東」、「債權人」、「員工」等公益。此法制設計深深影響了各國，相繼創設「公司負責人失格與解任制度」，以公益之保護、促進社會經濟健康發展與繁榮。 本國現行公司負責人失格與解任制度，主要係以公司法第30條公司負責人當然失格（消極資格）規定、公司法第200條裁判解任公司負責人與投保法第10-1條裁判解任上市櫃公司負責人等制度為主，惟因為消極資格訂定不符時宜、內涵不明確與裁判解任制度程序、形式要件限制過嚴、適用範圍窄小、缺乏彈性等問題，使得本國公司負責人失格與解任制度之實務運行有相當大的困難，進而造成本國妥善公司管理、維護公眾利益之目的達成甚有疑慮，多年來受到學者與實務之批判與改革倡議，抑是本文亟欲解決之問題，希冀透過比較先進法制國家之立法例，提供解決本國法制問題。 本文首先將各式公司負責人失格與解任制度設計類型化與抽象化，並歸納出三大類型：「股東會決議解任」、「請求宣告失格或解任」與「當然失格與解任」，以提供讀者體系性之法制概念架構，完整的窺探公司負責人失格與解任法制內涵與發展。其後，本文依序介紹英國、美國之法制設計，並以美國法為主軸比較本國失格與解任公司負責人制度，綜合比較分析優劣，並提出對於改善本國制度與創設相關配套之建議。

Unfit corporate responsible persons’ (e.g. company director) misconduct damages the commonweal such as the right of 'minority shareholders', 'creditors' and 'employees'. The legal systems of Disqualification and Removal of Corporate Responsible Persons (hereinafter “D&R Corporate Responsible Persons”) provide that government prohibits unfit defendant from serving as corporate responsible persons, and the purpose of the legal system is protecting the commonweal. However, the legal system including Article 30 and Article 200 of the Company Act, and Article 10-1 of the Securities Investor and Futures Trader Protection Act in Taiwan faces many problems today. It is difficult for minority shareholders, creditors and employees to file suits for disqualifying or removing “unfit” corporate responsible persons. In order to proposing solutions for improving the legislation in Taiwan, this thesis provides readers the details of legal systems of D&R Corporate Responsible Persons in the U.K., the U.S. and Taiwan. The beginning of legal systems of D&R Corporate Responsible Persons is the Company Directors Disqualification Act (CDDA) in the U.K. The advanced legislation design of the CDDA made great influence to other jurisdictions. Many countries, including Taiwan, created their own legal system of D&R Corporate Responsible Persons. The mechanism of commercial laws, especially securities law, in U.S. play important roles in establishing Taiwan’s commercial legal system. For solving the shortcoming of the legal systems of D&R Corporate Responsible Persons in Taiwan, it is necessary to focus on comparing legal systems in the U.S. and Taiwan. To provide readers with a bird’s-eye view of the legal systems of D&R Corporate Responsible Persons in the different jurisdictions, this thesis concludes that there are three types of mechanisms of D&R Corporate Responsible Persons: “Voting Removal”, “Disqualification or Removal on Application”, and “Disqualification or Removal by the Court”. In addition, this thesis concludes that Taiwan should give the government more power to investigate and file suits, and let minority shareholders, creditors and employees to file suits easily, like the legal system in U.K. and U.S, in order to protect the commonwealth.