专题1《公司法总则》

以下为本笔记本《系统精讲》中专题1《公司法总则》的全部逐字原文内容：

专题1《公司法总则》

一、公司的概念和特征

知识点 001 公司的概念和特征★

1. 公司的概念 公司是企业法人，有独立的法人财产，享有法人财产权。公司以其全部财产对公司的债务承担责任。

2. 公司的特征 (1) 法人性。公司属于民事主体分类中的“法人”。公司有独立的法人财产，承担独立责任。根据《民法典》第59条的规定，法人的民事权利能力和民事行为能力，从法人成立时产生，到法人终止时消灭。 (2) 社团性。公司是由股东出资组成的组织体。 (3) 营利性。公司是营利法人，以取得利润并分配给股东等出资人为目的而成立。 【萱站点睛】提示：合伙企业、个人独资企业虽然也是营利性企业，但其属于“非法人组织”。

知识点 002 股东有限责任原则★

1. 有限责任原则，是指有限责任公司的股东以其认缴的出资额为限对公司承担责任，股份有限公司的股东以其认购的股份为限对公司承担责任。

2. 该原则是为了解决“股东-公司-债权人”三者之间的关系，强调“股东”并不直接对“公司债务”承担清偿责任。

3. 股东承担有限责任的基础：认缴的出资额或者认购的股份。 【萱站点睛】易错：此处不是“实缴出资”。在认缴资本制度下，认缴出资≥实缴出资。

【随堂小测】 高某和刘某组建萱草贸易有限责任公司（以下简称“萱草公司”），公司注册资本为20万元，高某和刘某各认缴出资10万元。在高某和刘某各出资5万元后，萱草公司成立，并聘请陈某担任经理。 问1：萱草公司以20万元注册资本为限对萱草公司的债务负责，是否正确？ 答：错误。公司以其全部财产对公司的债务承担责任，而不是以“注册资本”为限对公司的债务负责。 问2：高某和刘某各以实缴出资5万元为限对萱草公司的债务负责，是否正确？ 答：错误。股东不是以“实缴”的数额为限对公司的债务承担责任，而是以各自认缴的出资额（10万元）为限对公司的债务负责。 问3：陈某是萱草公司的经理，无需对萱草公司的债务承担责任。 答：错误。陈某是萱草公司的经理，无需对萱草公司的债务承担责任。

知识点 003 公司的分类★

1. 人合性公司、资合性公司、人资两合性公司（按公司的信用来源为标准-学理分类） (1) 人合性公司，是指公司的经营活动以股东的个人信用而非公司资本的多寡为基础。一般规模小的企业会更强调“人合性”。我国没有人合性公司。 (2) 资合性公司，是指公司的经营活动以公司的资本规模为企业的信用基础。一般规模大的企业会更注重“资合性”。我国“股份有限公司”为资合性公司。 (3) 人合性兼资合性公司（人资两合性公司），是指公司的信用基础不仅包括股东的个人信用，还包括公司的资本和资产信用。我国“有限责任公司”为人资两合性公司。

2. 总公司-分公司、母公司-子公司（按公司间的关系为标准-学理分类） (1) 总公司-分公司 总公司，是指依法设立并管辖公司全部组织的具有企业法人资格的总机构。 分公司，是指在业务、资金、人事等方面受总公司管辖但不具有法人资格的分支机构。 (2) 母公司-子公司 母公司，是指拥有其他公司一定数额的股份或根据协议，能够控制、支配其他公司的人事、财务、业务等事项的公司。 子公司，是指一定数额的股份被另一公司控制或依照协议被另一公司实际控制、支配的公司。

[对比]

【随堂小测】

1. 请判断：有限公司体现更多的人合性，股份公司体现更多的资合性。 答：正确。例如，有限公司股权对外转让，其他股东享有同等条件下的优先购买权，这体现了有限公司的“人合性”；上市公司的股票可以自由转让，这体现了股份公司的“资合性”。

2. 请判断：有限公司具有更多的强制性规范，股份公司通过公司章程享有更多的意思自治。 答：错误。例如，涉及有限公司的条款中，大量出现“……公司章程另有规定的除外”，这表明其更强调意思自治。

3. A公司为拓宽市场，分别设立甲分公司和乙分公司。 问1：甲分公司的负责人在分公司的经营范围内，当然有权以A公司名义对外签订合同的权利。该说法是否正确？ 答：正确。分公司归属于总公司，是总公司的分支机构。甲分公司在自己的经营范围内，以A公司（总公司）名义签订合同并无不妥。 问2：A公司的债权人在A公司直接管理的财产不能清偿债务时，能否主张强制执行各分公司的财产？ 答：能。由于分公司没有独立的财产权，其财产本应归属于总公司，因此，当总公司（A公司）直接管理的财产不能清偿债务时，债权人主张以各分公司的财产清偿是合法的。

知识点 004 法定代表人★★

1. 法律规则 《公司法》第10、11条规定了法定代表人的产生、辞任及法定代表权，第35条规定了法定代表人的变更。 (1) 产生：公司的法定代表人按照公司章程的规定，由代表公司执行公司事务的董事或者经理担任。（《公司法》第10条第1款） (2) 辞任：担任法定代表人的董事或者经理辞任的，视为同时辞去法定代表人。法定代表人辞任的，公司应当在法定代表人辞任之日起30日内确定新的法定代表人。（《公司法》第10条第2、3款） (3) 变更：公司变更法定代表人的，变更登记申请书由变更后的法定代表人签署。（《公司法》第35条第3款）（强调：由新任法定代表人签署变更文件） (4) 法定代表权（《公司法》第11条） ❶ 法定代表人以公司名义从事的民事活动，其法律后果由公司承受。 ❷ 公司章程或者股东会对法定代表人职权的限制，不得对抗善意相对人。 ❸ 法定代表人因执行职务造成他人损害的，由公司承担民事责任。公司承担民事责任后，依照法律或者公司章程的规定，可以向有过错的法定代表人追偿。 【易错】在董事会中，只有“代表公司执行公司事务的董事”可担任法定代表人。上市公司的独立董事、国有独资公司的外部董事均非执行公司事务的董事，不可担任法定代表人。但“经理”无外部经理，所以“经理”均可担任法定代表人。

2. 实务难点：涤除法定代表人的诉讼及公司如何解任法定代表人 实务中，关于法定代表人的常见纠纷有两类，一类是“挂名法定代表人”向公司提出辞职后，公司迟迟不办理变更登记，导致该法定代表人的日常生活受到严重影响（如被限制高消费）；另一类是公司作出解任法定代表人的决议，但原法定代表人以任期期限未满为由拒绝承认决议的效力。上述纠纷目前可依据下列规则处理：

[第一类] 辞任纠纷（变更登记或涤除登记纠纷）： (1) 法定代表人以公司为被告，请求确认辞任生效并且由公司办理变更登记或者涤除登记信息的，人民法院应予受理； (2) 人民法院判决公司办理变更登记或者涤除登记信息的，应当同时确认法定代表人从公司收到书面辞任通知之日起辞任； (3) 法定代表人辞任的，不影响其在任职期间所应承担的责任。

[第二类] 解任纠纷： (1) 公司依据法律、行政法规或者章程的规定作出解任法定代表人决议的，法定代表人自决议作出之日起解任； (2) 被解任的法定代表人以未办理公司变更登记为由提出抗辩的，人民法院不予支持； (3) 法定代表人解任的，不影响其在任职期间所应承担的责任。

二、公司法人人格否认制度

知识点 005 公司法人人格否认的认定、分类★★★

1. 适用前提 其适用前提为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。此时，若依然固守股东有限责任原则，坚持“法人以其全部财产独立承担民事责任”，则会出现对公司债权人保护失衡的现象。作为对“股东有限责任原则”的补充，公司法确立了否认公司独立人格的规则，即“公司法人人格否认”。

2. 判断标准 是否构成“公司法人人格否认”，关键看公司是否具有独立意思和独立财产，是否丧失独立性，沦为控制股东的工具。

3. 实务难点：如何认定“公司丧失独立性，构成人格否认” 实务中，下列情形可以认定为股东滥用公司法人独立地位和股东有限责任，导致公司独立人格被否认： (1) 控股股东过度控制公司 实务中，认定“控股股东过度控制公司”，要综合考量以下因素：①数个公司都受同一控股股东的控制，相关公司自身丧失独立意思；②数个公司之间进行不当利益输送；③不当利益输送行为意在逃避公司债务。 (2) 股东与公司的财产混同 实务中，认定“股东与公司的财产是否混同”，要综合考量以下因素：①股东财产能否与公司财产进行区分，主要看是否作了财务记载；②股东是否无偿使用甚至侵占了公司财产；③是否存在人员混同、业务混同、住所混同等情形。必要时，人民法院可以根据当事人的申请，通过委托审计等方式认定是否构成财产混同。 (3) 股东投入公司的资本显著不足 实务中，认定“股东投入公司的资本是否显著不足”，要综合考量以下因素：①股东实际投入公司的资本是否与公司经营所隐含的风险明显不匹配；②股东是否存在使公司过度举债、恶意举债等方式，把投资风险转嫁给债权人的恶意。 [例] A公司的注册资本为10万元，但A公司对外签订购买商业大飞机的合同，合同金额高达1亿元。后A公司因无力清偿债务而被债权人起诉。此为典型的“资本显著不足”。

4. 公司法人人格否认的分类纵向法人人格否认（图1）：认定：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。责任承担：左述股东应当对公司债务承担连带责任。横向法人人格否认（图2）：认定：股东利用其控制的2个以上公司实施上述行为。责任承担：各公司应当对任一公司的债务承担连带责任。 [特别提示] 在存在“横向法人人格否认”情形时，公司债权人有权依据《公司法》第23条第1款规定请求控股股东承担连带责任。（即同时主张“股东”承担连带责任） 图1 甲公司与A公司的关系：股东甲公司 → 混同、控制 → A公司 图2 A、B、C公司的关系：股东甲公司 → 混同、控制 → A公司、B公司、C公司 【提示】纵向法人人格否认：“股东-公司”的关系；横向法人人格否认：“公司-公司”的关系。

5. 特殊规则：一人公司法人人格否认，采用举证责任倒置。 (1) 前提：仅限于“一人公司”，即只有1个股东的公司，包括一人有限责任公司和一人股份有限公司； (2) 处理：股东不能证明公司财产独立于股东自己的财产的，应当对公司债务承担连带责任。 【提示】只有“一人公司”的法人人格否认，举证责任由股东承担。如果是非一人公司（即有多名股东的公司），则在法人人格否认诉讼中，仍然采用“谁主张，谁举证”的原则，即由“公司债权人”承担举证责任。

6. 争议问题：是否承认“逆向人格否认”？ (1) 问题：在出现股东滥用公司法人独立地位和股东有限责任时，公司是否要对股东的债务承担连带责任？ (2) 处理： ❶ 一般情况下，没有“逆向否认法人人格”的必要。 ❷ 例外： A. “一人公司”在法人人格混同这一特定情形下，由于股东财产与公司财产边界不清、无法区分，因此将产生母、子公司对债务互负连带责任的效果； B. 在实质合并破产程序中，母、子公司的财产统一向所有债权人承担责任，由此会在形式上产生以子公司财产为母公司债务承担责任的效果，可以认为属于“逆向否认法人人格”的情形。 强调：上述情况非常特殊，应仅限于“法人人格混同”这一特定情形。

【随堂小测】

1. 甲公司持有A公司70%的股份并派员担任董事长，乙公司持股30%。后甲公司将A公司的资产全部用于甲公司的另一个大型投资项目。待债权人丙公司要求A公司偿还货款时，发现A公司的资产不足以清偿。 问：甲公司是否应对该笔债务承担清偿责任？乙公司是否应对该笔债务承担清偿责任？ 答：(1) 甲公司应承担连带清偿责任。甲公司持股比例高达70%，支配和操纵A公司的决策过程，构成滥用法人独立地位。 (2) 乙公司没有滥用法人独立地位和股东有限责任，无需对A公司的债务承担连带清偿责任。

2. 甲公司与A公司签订《股权转让协议》，约定甲公司将其65%的股权有偿转让给A公司，并完成了股权变更登记手续，但A公司未完全支付对价。另查明，A公司现持有B公司100%的股权。A公司无法提供证据证明其和B公司财产独立。甲公司诉至法院，要求A、B公司承担连带责任。 问：B公司是否应对股东A公司的债务承担连带清偿责任？ 答：B公司应对A公司的债务承担连带清偿责任。A公司未提供证据证明B公司的财产独立于自己的财产，两家公司在法律上应视为同一责任主体，构成人格混同。

知识点 006 公司法人人格否认诉讼★★★

1. 债权未经生效裁判确认 (1) 债权人对公司享有的债权未经生效裁判确认，仅请求股东、其他公司对公司债务承担连带责任的，人民法院应当向债权人释明，告知其追加公司为共同被告； (2) 债权人拒绝追加的，应当裁定驳回起诉。

2. 债权已经生效裁判确认 (1) 债权人对公司享有的债权虽经生效裁判确认，但未依据《公司法》第23条（即法人人格否认条款）规定起诉股东、其他公司承担连带责任，而是直接申请变更、追加股东、其他公司为被执行人，对公司债务承担连带责任的，人民法院应当裁定驳回变更、追加申请，并告知其另行提起诉讼。 (2) 申请执行人对该裁定不服的，可以向上级人民法院申请复议；直接提起执行异议之诉的，人民法院不予受理。

三、公司的决议

分析方法：先分析决议是否成立，再分析决议的效力。 公司决议判断步骤：

知识点 007 公司决议的效力、公司决议之诉讼

公司决议可分为不成立的决议、有效决议、无效决议、可撤销决议。

【提示】

1. 股东会违反法律规定作出决议，将依法只能由股东会行使的职权授予董事会行使，或者将法律明确规定只能由董事会行使的职权收归股东会行使，当事人请求确认该决议无效的，法院应予支持。

2. 股东会或者董事会超越职权，对依法不属于公司决议事项作出决议，当事人请求确认该决议无效的，法院应予支持。

知识点 008 决议效力瑕疵的后果

股东会、董事会决议被法院宣告无效、撤销或者确认不成立的：

1. 公司应当向公司登记机关申请撤销根据该决议已办理的登记；

2. 公司根据该决议与善意相对人形成的民事法律关系不受影响。

[例1-不成立的决议] 决议程序存在重大瑕疵，该瑕疵导致决议没有达到法定最低合意。 (1) A公司没有召开股东会，董事长伪造全部股东的签名，出具了一份股东会更换董事张某的决议。因为“未召开会议”，所以该决议为“不成立的决议”。 (2) A公司召开股东会讨论利润分配问题，各股东均签名同意。但会议结束后，董事长刘某在决议中加上一条“同意为A公司的股东B公司向甲银行的1000万元贷款承担连带责任担保”。因为这次股东会“未对担保决议事项进行表决”，所以该担保决议为“不成立的决议”。 (3) A公司章程规定，至少5人出席可召开股东会。现有仅2名股东出席。因为不符合章程规定的最低参会人数，所以该次股东会作出的决议为“不成立的决议”。 (4) A公司讨论和B公司合并的决议，现有代表30%表决权的股东同意。因为未达到法定的“经代表2/3以上表决权的股东通过”的比列，所以该次股东会作出的“同意合并决议”为“不成立的决议”。

[例2-有效决议] A公司召开股东会讨论增加注册资本。这次会议股东均参加且表决合法，但会议记录有大股东B和记录员签字，其他股东未签字。如无其他情形，该决议有效。

[例3-无效决议] 公司股东会决议分配本年度利润时，未弥补上年度亏损、未纳税、未提取法定公积金，直接向股东分红。该决议“内容违反《公司法》的强制性规定”，为无效决议。或者，董事会作出分配利润的决议。该决议因“不属于董事会职权范围”而无效。

[例4-可撤销决议] A公司早上10点通知全体股东，于当天下午2点在公司会议室召开股东会。股东张某当日恰好在外地出差，无法赶回。虽然其他股东表决通过了该决议，但是张某不认可该决议，他有权请求撤销该决议。这属于会议召集程序违法。

【经典案例】 甲公司有A、B、C三位股东，三人组成董事会。公司章程规定，董事会享有解聘经理等职权；董事会必须由2/3以上（人数）的董事出席；董事会决议经占全体股东2/3以上（人数）的董事表决通过有效。某日，甲公司召开董事会，三位董事均出席，会议形成了“鉴于总经理B未经董事会同意，私自动用公司资金在二级市场炒股，给公司造成巨大损失，现免去其经理职务，即日生效”的决议。该决议由A、C签名，B未在该决议上签名。经查，B私自炒股的事实与董事会的认定存在重大偏差。 问：甲公司董事会免除B总经理职务的决议是否有效？ 答：有效。本案的决议内容是“董事会免除总经理职务”，该内容本身并不违反公司章程，也不违反《公司法》的规定，且该次会议在召集程序、表决方式上均无明显瑕疵，所以该决议是有效决议。

四、公司担保决议、担保责任的承担

知识点 009 公司担保的种类、决议程序★★★

(一) 关联担保

1. 类型 关联担保包括：①公司为公司股东或者实际控制人提供担保；②公司为其控股股东或者实际控制人直接或者间接控制的公司提供担保，参照适用公司对外提供关联担保的规定，但是相对人在订立担保合同时经合理审查后仍不知道前述控制关系的除外；③有限责任公司为他人取得本公司或者其母公司的股权提供担保的，参照适用公司对外提供关联担保的规定。

2. 决议规则 (1) 公司对外提供关联担保的，应当经股东会决议。 (2) 被担保的股东或者受被担保的实际控制人支配的股东，不得参加上述事项的表决。该项表决由出席会议的其他股东所持表决权的过半数通过。（利害关系人表决排除规则）

(二) 非关联担保

1. 概念 非关联担保，是指公司向其他企业投资或者为他人提供担保。

2. 决议规则 (1) 按照公司章程的规定，由董事会或者股东会决议； (2) 公司章程对投资或者担保的总额及单项投资或者担保的数额有限额规定的，不得超过规定的限额。

知识点 010 无需担保决议的五种情况★★★

下列五种例外情形，公司未依照前述规定作出决议的，要承担担保责任：

1. 金融机构开立保函或者担保公司提供担保。 [例] A公司是小额贷款股份公司，担保是其主要业务，则A公司提供担保的，无需出具公司决议。

2. 公司为其全资子公司（一人公司）开展经营活动提供担保。 [例] A公司投资设立B公司，B公司的全部资金均来源于A公司，则B公司是A公司的全资子公司。此时，A公司为B公司的借款提供担保的，无需A公司股东会出具同意担保的决议。

3. 担保合同由单独或者共同持有公司2/3以上担保事项有表决权的股东签字同意。 【提示】担保合同≠担保决议。 “担保合同”是指担保人和相对人签订的合同；而“担保决议”是指承担担保责任的公司内部出具的决议。

4. 一人公司（全资子公司）为其股东提供担保。 [例] B公司是A公司的全资子公司（B公司是一人公司），则B公司为其唯一股东A公司的借款提供担保的，无需B公司召开股东会，出具同意担保的决议，因为此时B公司仅有A公司一个股东，无法满足排除被担保股东（A公司）表决权的要求。

5. 相对人根据上市公司公开披露的关于担保事项已经董事会或者股东会决议通过的信息，与上市公司订立担保合同的，担保合同对上市公司发生效力，并由上市公司承担担保责任。 【原理】担保不是法定代表人所能单独决定的事项，除上述五种例外情况外，要以公司的决议作为担保授权的基础和来源。

知识点 011 越权担保的处理★★★

1. 越权担保的概念 越权担保，是指公司的法定代表人违反公司担保决议程序的有关规定，超越权限代表公司与相对人订立担保合同。

2. 法定代表人的责任 法定代表人超越权限提供担保造成公司损失的，应当对公司承担赔偿责任。

3. 担保合同的效力与责任承担

【注】《担保制度解释》第17条 主合同有效而第三方提供的担保合同无效，人民法院应当区分不同情形确定担保人的赔偿责任： (一) 债权人与担保人均有过错的，担保人承担的赔偿责任不应超过债务人不能清偿部分的1/2； (二) 担保人有过错而债权人无过错的，担保人对债务人不能清偿的部分承担赔偿责任； (三) 债权人有过错而担保人无过错的，担保人不承担赔偿责任。 主合同无效导致第三人提供的担保合同无效，担保人无过错的，不承担赔偿责任；担保人有过错的，其承担的赔偿责任不应超过债务人不能清偿部分的1/3。

【随堂小测】 A公司和甲银行签订借款100万元的合同，萱草公司为该合同提供担保。 问1：如果A公司是萱草公司的股东。萱草公司董事会作出为该笔借款提供担保的决议。据此决议，萱草公司董事长高某与甲银行签订担保合同，该份担保合同有董事长高某的签名，并盖有萱草公司的公章。甲银行是否尽到了合理审查义务？ 答：没有尽到合理审查义务。董事会决议违反法律规定，甲银行不构成善意。 问2：如果A公司不是萱草公司的股东。萱草公司章程规定，为他人提供担保的，需经股东会决议。但本次萱草公司董事会作出为该笔借款提供担保的决议。据此决议，萱草公司董事长高某与甲银行签订担保合同，该份担保合同有董事长高某的签名，并盖有萱草公司的公章。甲银行是否尽到了合理审查义务？ 答：尽到了合理审查义务。为他人提供担保可以由董事会决议，甲银行构成善意。 问3：如果上述（问2）董事会决议系法定代表人高某伪造或者变造、表决程序违法、签章（名）不实、担保金额超过法定限额等，甲银行是否尽到了合理审查义务？ 答：尽到了合理审查义务。甲银行仅需对决议进行形式审查。 问4：如果（接问2）萱草公司有证据证明在签订合同时一并提交了章程给甲银行，甲银行是否尽到了合理审查义务？ 答：没有尽到合理审查义务。甲银行不构成善意。

总结：公司担保分析步骤（债权人视角）

01 常考角度总结 SUMMARIZE

1. 对“公司的独立性”“股东有限责任原则”的理解和运用。判断股东是否对公司债务承担连带责任。

2. 理解有限责任公司和股份有限公司的区别。

3. 区分分公司、子公司的债务清偿。可总结为：“总-分，不分家；母-子，要独立。”

4. 公司法定代表人的产生、辞任、法定代表权。

5. 纵向法人人格否认与横向法人人格否认的认定和责任，一人公司法人人格否认举证责任倒置。

6. 股东滥用股东权利的赔偿责任。

7. 公司决议效力的认定和处理。先判断某项决议是否成立，再判断其效力。依据为：①决议内容是否合法、合章程；②会议的召集程序和表决方式是否合法、合章程。

8. 公司担保合同的效力与责任承担。

专题2《公司的设立和公司登记》

以下为本笔记本《系统精讲》中专题2《公司的设立和公司登记》的全部逐字原文内容：

专题2《公司的设立和公司登记》

一、公司的设立

公司设立，是指公司设立时的股东（发起人）依照法定条件和程序，为组建公司并取得法人资格而必须采取和完成的法律行为。

知识点 012 公司的设立条件★★

公司的设立条件，包括设立时的股东（或发起人）、注册资本、名称、住所、组织机构、公司章程等事项。

1. 发起人等事项

〔1〕 存量公司注册资本的处理： 2024年6月30日前登记设立的公司：①有限责任公司剩余缴出资期限自2027年7月1日起超过5年的，应当在2027年6月30日前将其剩余缴出资期限调整至5年内并记载于公司章程，股东应当在调整后的认缴出资期限内足额缴纳认缴的出资额（3年过渡+5年实缴）；②股份有限公司的发起人应当在2027年6月30日前按照其认购的股份全额缴纳股款（3年过渡）。对于出资期限、注册资本明显异常的，公司登记机关可以依法要求公司及时调整。具体实施办法由国务院规定。（《国务院关于实施〈中华人民共和国公司法〉注册资本登记管理制度的规定》第2条第1款、第3条）

组织机构：公司具备组织机构。（略，见专题7“公司的组织机构”） 公司章程：（略，见下文）

1. 公司章程 (1) 公司章程，是指公司所必备的，规定其名称、宗旨、资本、组织机构等事务的基本法律文件。 (2) 公司章程对公司、股东、董事、监事、高级管理人员具有约束力。上述人员，既包括设立时的股东、董事等，也包括公司成立后新加入公司的上述主体。 (3) 公司超越章程从事的经营活动，只要该行为未违反法律、行政法规的规定，该行为就有效。 (4) 公司章程的制定、修改、条款

【随堂小测】 甲公司章程规定，董事长未经股东会授权，不得处置公司资产，也不得以公司名义签订非经营性合同。一日，董事长任某见王某买了一辆新款宝马车，遂决定以自己乘坐的公司的旧奔驰车与王某交换，并办理了车辆过户登记手续。 问：任某的换车行为是否有效？ 答：章程的效力不及于交易第三人。当王某是善意时，甲公司董事长任某的交易行为有效。给甲公司造成损失的，任某应当承担赔偿责任。

1. 股东协议 (1) 股东协议，是指部分或者全体股东之间签订的协议。（既包括设立时的股东签订的设立协议，也包括公司成立后股东之间签订的协议） (2) 依据合同的相对性，部分或者全体股东之间签订的协议不存在无效或者可撤销的情形，股东依据协议请求其他股东承担责任的，法院应予支持。 (3) 原则上，股东主张上述股东协议对公司发生效力的，法院不予支持。 例外情形：①全体股东就股东会决议事项以书面形式一致表示同意，并在决定文件上签名或者盖章；②法律明确规定全体股东的约定对公司发生效力；等等。

知识点 013 公司的设立责任★★

1. 合同效力 公司在设立阶段签订的合同的效力，依据民法典的规定来判断。

2. 合同责任 (1) 有限责任公司设立时的股东（股份有限公司的发起人）为设立公司从事的民事活动，其法律后果由公司承受。 (2) 公司未成立的，其法律后果由公司设立时的股东（发起人）承受；设立时的股东（发起人）为2人以上的，享有连带债权，承担连带债务。 (3) 设立时的股东（发起人）为设立公司以自己的名义从事民事活动产生的民事责任，第三人有权选择请求公司或者公司设立时的股东（发起人）承担。

【随堂小测】 甲、乙、丙、丁拟设立一家商贸公司，就设立事宜分工负责，其中，丙负责租赁公司运营所需的仓库。因公司尚未成立，丙为方便签订合同，遂以自己的名义与戊签订了仓库租赁合同。 问：该租金债务及其责任应当如何承担？ 答：商贸公司成立后，戊有选择权，既可要求丙承担责任，也可要求商贸公司承担责任。

(4) 设立时的股东（发起人）以设立中公司的名义从事民事活动，相对人请求公司承担民事责任的，法院应当依法予支持，但是公司能够证明该民事活动与设立公司无关的除外。 ❶ 若从事该民事活动的目的“设立公司”，由公司承担民事责任。 ❷ 若该民事活动与设立公司无关，则由设立时的股东（发起人）承担民事责任。例如，设立人张三签订了一份房屋租赁合同，虽然是以“萱草公司筹备组”的名义签订的，但该房屋是张三自住，与设立萱草公司无关，则房屋租金由设立人张三承担，而非由公司承担。 ❸ 设立时的股东（发起人）以设立中公司的名义从事民事活动，公司未成立，相对人请求其他设立人承担连带责任的，法院应当依法予以支持，但是其他设立人能够证明该民事活动与设立公司无关的除外。

1. 侵权责任 设立时的股东因履行公司设立职责造成他人损害的，公司或者无过错的股东承担赔偿责任后，可以向有过错的股东追偿。

知识点 014 公司的设立方式〔1〕

〔1〕设立股份有限公司，可以采取发起设立或者募集设立的方式；有限责任公司的设立方式，《公司法》没有规定。

1. 发起设立 (1) 概念：由发起人认购公司设立时应发行的全部股份而设立公司。 (2) 程序： ❶ 发起人应当认购公司章程规定的公司设立时应发行的股份； ❷ 发起人应当在公司成立前按照其认购的股份全额缴纳股款。

2. 募集设立★★ (1) 概念：由发起人认购公司设立时应发行股份的一部分，其余股份向特定对象募集或者向社会公开募集而设立公司。 (2) 程序：

[返还股款的情形] 出现下列情形的，认购人可以按照所缴股款并加算银行同期存款利息，要求发起人返还： (1) 公司设立时应发行的股份未募足； (2) 发行股份的股款缴足后，发起人在30日内未召集创立大会； (3) 创立大会决议不设立公司。

【易错】

1. 章程由发起人“制订”，由创立大会“通过”。

2. 验资对象：验募集的外人股款；创立大会审核对象：审发起人的非货币财产出资。

【随堂小测】 甲、乙二公司拟募集设立一股份有限公司。他们在获准向社会募股后实施的下列哪些行为是违法的？(2006/3/71)〔1〕 A. 其认股书上记载：认股人一旦认购股份就不得撤回 B. 与某银行签订承销股份和代收股款协议，由该银行代售股份和代收股款 C. 在招股说明书上告知：公司章程由发起人在成立大会上共同制订 D. 在招股说明书上告知：股款缴足后将在60日内召开创立大会 〔1〕 ABCD

知识点 015 公司形式变更★

1. 概念 公司形式变更，是指由有限责任公司变更为股份有限公司，或者由股份有限公司变更为有限责任公司。

2. 具体要求 (1) 均要符合变更后公司的条件（即公司设立的条件）。有限责任公司变更为股份有限公司，为增加注册资本公开发行股份时，应当依法办理。 (2) 均要经过股东会表决通过。 (3) 公司变更前的债权、债务均由变更后的公司承继。

3. 特殊规定 有限责任公司变更为股份有限公司时，折合的实收股本总额不得高于公司净资产额。 净资产额=总资产额-负债。例如，公司总资产为1000万元，其中，银行贷款200万元，则净资产为800万元。

二、公司登记

知识点 016 公司登记事项、公示事项

【易错】

1. 2023年修订后的《公司法》增加规定了公示股东的“出资额、出资方式和出资日期”。（原《公司法》仅要求公示股东的“姓名或者名称”）

2. 股份有限公司仅需登记公示“发起人”的相关情况，而非“全体股东”，如上市公司的股东无需全部公示。

3. 股东（发起人）的姓名/名称、法定代表人的姓名，需要登记+公示。

知识点 017 公司登记类型、登记程序★

公司登记分为三类：设立登记、变更登记、注销登记。

【随堂小测】 某市国有资产管理部门决定将甲、乙两个国有独资公司撤销，合并成立甲股份有限公司，合并后的甲股份有限公司仍使用原甲公司的字号。该合并事项已经有关部门批准，现欲办理商业登记。甲股份有限公司的商业登记属于下列哪一类型的登记？〔1〕 A. 兼并登记 B. 设立登记 C. 变更登记 D. 注销登记 〔1〕 B

三、股东的查阅、复制权（知情权）

股东有权查阅或者复制公司的特定文件材料，这项权利是股东行使其他权利的基础。如果股东无法了解公司的会议记录、不明了公司的财务情况，则无法就分红等其他权利进行主张。 但在保护股东该项知情权的同时，又要防止股东随意干涉公司的独立经营，给公司经营造成不必要的损害。所以《公司法》既规定了股东的查阅、复制权，又对股东行使该项权利进行了必要限制。

知识点 018 股东知情权的内容

〔2〕 会计账簿，包括明细账、总账等，可具体直观地反映公司的经营情况。会计凭证，包括原始凭证和记账凭证。根据《会计法》第14条第2、5款的规定，办理经济业务事项，必须填制或者取得原始凭证并及时送交会计机构。记账凭证应当根据经过审核的原始凭证及有关资料编制。

知识点 019 股东知情权纠纷的实务难点

1. 知情权诉讼的原告是否必须为股东？ (1) 原告：股东依据公司法或者公司章程的规定请求查阅、复制公司特定文件材料，起诉时不具有股东资格的，人民法院不予受理；但是原告有初步证据证明在持股期间其合法权益受到损害的，可以提起知情权诉讼。（即起诉时不是股东，但可“倒查”） (2) 被告：公司。

【随堂小测】 萱草有限责任公司于2016年成立后，没有给股东发过一次红利，并对外拖欠大量债务。2021年5月，大栗认为公司没有发展前景，便将其股权卖给外人甲。2023年6月，大栗在另一诉讼中得知萱草有限责任公司过去若干年经营情况非常良好，但大栗股东兼董事长魏某隐瞒营业收入并转移公司财产。 问：大栗能否要求查阅2021年5月之后的公司会计账簿？ 答：不能。但大栗有权要求查阅2021年5月之前的公司会计账簿。

1. 股东能否直接提起知情权诉讼？ 股东没有提供初步证据证明已经向公司提出查阅、摘录公司会计账簿、会计凭证的书面请求且被拒绝，直接请求查阅、摘录会计账簿、会计凭证的，人民法院不予受理。

2. 如何认定“不正当目的”？ 司法实践中，公司举证证明股东出于以下目的申请查阅、摘录会计账簿、会计凭证，一般可以认定股东具有“不正当目的”： (1) 股东自营业务与公司主营业务有实质性竞争关系的，但是公司章程另有规定或者全体股东另有约定的除外； (2) 股东为了向他人通报有关信息申请查阅的，且该通报行为为非法定、行政法规规定该股东应当履行的义务； (3) 股东有不正当目的的其他情形。

【随堂小测】 大栗是萱草有限责任公司的股东，同时还担任百果有限责任公司的总经理。已知，萱草有限责任公司与百果有限责任公司均从事快餐连锁业务。 问：萱草有限责任公司能否以大栗担任百果有限责任公司的总经理为由，拒绝其查账请求？ 答：能。因为两公司“有实质性竞争关系”，属于“股东查账具有不正当目的”的情形。

1. 公司章程能否限制股东知情权？ (1) 公司章程、股东之间的协议等实质性剥夺股东依据公司法规定享有的查阅、复制公司有关文件材料的权利，股东请求确认相关规定或者约定无效，并请求查阅、复制公司有关文件材料的，人民法院应予支持； (2) 公司章程、股东之间的协议等合理限制或者扩大股东依据公司法规定享有的查阅、复制公司有关文件材料的权利，股东据此向公司主张知情权的，人民法院应予支持。

02 常考角度总结 SUMMARIZE

1. 有限责任公司股东出资额的最长期限为“自公司成立之日起5年内”。

2. 章程对哪些主体具有约束力？强调：章程对债权人、劳动者无约束力。债权人与公司依据民法等确定合同效力，劳动者与公司依据劳动合同确定法律关系。

3. 公司设立阶段合同的效力以及清偿责任的主体。在判断谁承担责任时，要考虑“以谁之名，为谁之实”。

4. 募集设立的具体程序。

5. 公司登记的类型、需要公示事项。

6. 2023年《公司法》增加了“股份有限公司符合条件的股东有权查阅公司会计账簿、会计凭证”的新规。

7. 公司以“有不正当目的”为由拒绝股东查账的，其理由是否合法。

专题1《公司法总则》

考点 1 公司分类（总-分公司、母-子公司、有限责任公司、股份有限公司）

第1题 植根农业是北方省份一家从事农产品加工的公司。为拓宽市场，该公司在南方某省分别设立甲分公司与乙分公司。关于分公司的法律地位与责任，下列哪一选项是错误的？(2017/3/25-单)

A 甲分公司的负责人在分公司经营范围内，当然享有以植根公司名义对外签订合同的权利

B 植根公司的债权人在植根公司直接管理的财产不能清偿债务时，可主张强制执行各分公司的财产

C 甲分公司的债权人在甲分公司直接管理的财产不能清偿债务时，可主张强制执行植根公司的财产

D 乙分公司的债权人在乙分公司直接管理的财产不能清偿债务时，不得主张强制执行甲分公司直接管理的财产

考点 2 法定代表人

第2题 A公司有甲、乙、丙、丁四个董事，同时担任法定代表人。丙和甲、乙产生冲突，丙欲辞去董事职务。下列说法正确的是：(2024-回忆版-单)

A 董事辞任需要经过股东会决议

B 公司收到辞呈的，同时丧失董事和法定代表人的身份

C 丙仅提出辞去董事职务，为了公司的进一步经营，应保留丙的法定代表人身份

D 丙尚在任期内，该辞任不能生效

考点 3 公司法人人格否认

第3题 零盛公司的两个股东是甲公司和乙公司。甲公司持股70%并派员担任董事长，乙公司持股30%。后甲公司将零盛公司的资产全部用于甲公司的另一个大型投资项目，待债权人丙公司要求零盛公司偿还货款时，发现零盛公司的资产不足以清偿。关于本案，下列哪一选项是正确的？(2016/3/27-单)

A 甲公司对丙公司应承担清偿责任

B 甲公司和乙公司按出资比例对丙公司承担清偿责任

C 甲公司和乙公司对丙公司承担连带清偿责任

D 丙公司只能通过零盛公司的破产程序来受偿

第4题 甲公司持有乙公司60%的股权，同时是丙公司的控股股东。乙公司的另一个股东为丁公司，持股40%。乙公司章程规定，日常运作与经营管理由甲公司委派1名董事全权负责。甲公司委派张某担任乙公司法定代表人，后甲公司授意张某以乙公司名义签订合同后再将乙公司的资产分批转移给丙公司，而丁公司一直未发现此事。现乙公司债权人戊公司发现乙公司资产不足以偿付其债权。对此，下列哪一说法是正确的？(2025-回忆版-单)

A 应由甲、乙、丙公司对戊公司承担连带清偿责任

B 应由甲、乙、丙、丁公司对戊公司承担连带清偿责任

C 应由甲、丁公司对戊公司承担连带清偿责任

D 应由甲、乙公司对戊公司承担连带清偿责任

考点 4 公司决议的效力、公司决议之诉讼

第5题 2016年，陈某和周某共同创办了逐月有限公司，其中，陈某持有公司67%的股权，并担任董事长、法定代表人。公司章程规定，只要公司可分配利润超过10万元，即应向周某分配10万元，剩余部分向陈某分配。2017年，逐月公司业绩不佳，税后利润提取公积金后，公司可分配利润仅为11万元。当年股东会会议中，陈某以周某业务能力差、对公司贡献缺少为由，主张将可分配利润全部分配给自己，不向周某分配。该决议两股东签字，但周某注明了反对意见。据此，当年的全部利润分配给了陈某。对此，下列哪些说法是正确的？(2018-回忆版-多)

A 周某可以主张该决议无效

B 周某可以主张撤销该决议

C 周某可以主张公司赔偿其损失

<

D 周某可以主张陈某赔偿其损失

第6题 甲、乙、丙是萱草有限公司股东，甲是董事长且持股比例为67%。甲欲收购B公司，因与乙有矛盾，2018年9月，萱草公司召开股东会会议时未通知持股比例10%的乙。该次股东会在甲的主导下通过了收购B公司的决议，并且，甲让秘书伪造乙的签名。就该事件的判断，下列哪些说法符合法律规定？(2019-回忆版-多)

A 该决议为可撤销决议，乙才知道决议作出之日起60日内有权请求法院撤销

B 乙虽未参见但未造成实质影响，该决议有效

C 该决议因伪造签名导致收购B公司的行为无效

D 乙若提出决议效力诉讼，可以列B公司为第三人

第7题 大成公司的股东蔡某是公司的大股东和法定代表人，2018年12月，公司董事会召集股东会商议收购耀光公司的股权事宜，由于工作人员失误，未通知持有公司1%股权的股东郑某。蔡某提议转让大成公司的一块土地使用权给耀光公司作为受让股权的对价，在蔡某的操作下，股东会通过该决议并让秘书代替郑某签字，郑某知道后坚决不同意，诉至法院。该股东会决议效力如何？(2020-回忆版-单)

A 该股东会决议无效

B 该股东会决议可撤销

C 该股东会决议有效

D 该股东会决议不成立

考点 5 公司担保决议、担保责任的承担

第8题 甲、乙、丙、丁四人共同出资设立A有限责任公司，甲担任董事长兼法定代表人。公司章程规定，为本公司股东提供担保的，需要董事会一致通过。在公司经营过程中，甲擅自以A公司的名义为其朋友的B公司借款提供担保，并将伪造的董事会决议交给债权人审查。另外，经过董事会决议，A公司为丙的一笔个人债务提供了担保，债权人也审查了董事会决议。据此，下列哪些说法是正确的？(2022-回忆版-多)

A A公司需要对B公司的债务承担担保责任

B A公司不需要对B公司的债务承担担保责任

C A公司董事会作出的为股东丙提供担保的决议无效

D A公司不需要对丙的债务承担担保责任

专题2《公司的设立和公司登记》

考点 6 公司的设立责任

第9题 张某、王某、李某约定共同设立萱草有限责任公司，并约定设立过程中产生的费用和债务由三人平均分担。在公司的筹备过程中，张某以自己的名义与甲公司签订合同，购买办公用品若干，货款50万元。王某以设立中萱草公司的名义与乙公司签署房屋租赁合同，租赁5间房屋作为萱草公司的办公室。李某在外出旅游的路上发生交通事故，将刘某撞伤，李某负全责。现在萱草公司设立失败。下列哪些说法是正确的？(2022-回忆版-多)

A 刘某有权要求张某、王某、李某承担连带责任

B 张某、王某、李某应按约定的份额对甲公司承担责任

C 乙公司有权要求张某、王某、李某承担连带责任

D 如果王某清偿了对乙公司的全部债务，其有权要求张某、李某按约定比例分担责任

考点 7 公司的设立方式

第10题 甲、乙、丙等拟以募集方式设立厚亿股份有限公司。经过较长时间的筹备，公司设立的各项事务逐渐完成，现大股东甲准备组织召开公司创立大会。下列哪些表述是正确的？(2016/3/70 改编-多)

A 厚亿公司的章程应在创立大会上通过

B 甲、乙、丙等出资的验资证明应由创立大会审核

C 厚亿公司的经营方针应在创立大会上决定

D 设立厚亿公司的各种费用应由创立大会审核

第11题 甲、乙、丙共同出资1亿元设立某有限责任公司，后公司收益颇丰，净资产达到1.7亿元，三人欲将公司转换为股份有限公司，为将来公司上市做准备。下列说法正确的有：(2018-回忆版-多)

A 如变更后的股份有限公司注册资本为2亿元，则所增加的注册资本可以由甲、乙、丙三人认购

B 如变更后的股份有限公司注册资本为2亿元，则所增加的注册资本可向社会公开募集，但不能定向募集

C 如变更后的股份有限公司注册资本为1.7亿元，则公司不必另行办理增资程序

D 如注册资本变更为1.7亿元后，发现原公司净资产计算有误，漏记了一笔1000万元的对外债务，则此差额应由甲、乙、丙三人承担连带补足责任<

考点 8 股东知情权

第12题 甲、乙、丙、丁、戊五人是昌盛有限公司的股东，其中，甲持有公司股权比例为1%；乙持有公司股权比例为2%；丙持有公司股权比例为17%，但丙与好友赵某签订了股权代持协议，约定由好友赵某实际出资，享受投资收益；丁持有公司股权比例为30%；戊持有公司股权比例为50%，且担任公司董事长。公司章程规定，持股比例低于5%的股东不得查阅公司会计账簿。对此，下列说法正确的是：(2018-回忆版-单)

A 甲有权查阅公司会计账簿

B 丙无权查阅公司会计账簿

C 赵某无权查阅公司会计账簿

D 丁有权查阅并复制公司会计账簿

第13题 金银有限责任公司是一家从事口罩生产与销售的公司，古某是执行董事，任某是股东之一。同时，任某为旭阳公司的实际控制人，旭阳公司也从事口罩生产与销售。2021年7月，由于金银公司3年未向股东分红，任某向古某提出，要求查阅和复制金银公司的财务会计报告、会计账簿等文件材料。下列哪一说法是正确的？(2021-回忆版-单)

A 金银公司与旭阳公司间存在实质性竞争关系，任某不得查阅和复制金银公司的财务会计报告

B 金银公司与旭阳公司间存在实质性竞争关系，任某不得查阅和复制金银公司的会计账簿

C 金银公司的任何文件材料，都不允许任某进行查阅和复制

D 当古某未妥善保存金银公司的文件材料时，任某可起诉金银公司要求查阅和复制文件材料

第14题 甲有限公司的股东李某持股比例为3%。甲公司全体股东约定，李某不参与公司的经营管理，不过问公司事务，不得查阅会计账簿，以此条件换取李某的分红比例为10%。后甲公司连续3年未进行利润分配，李某直接向法院提起知情权之诉，要求查阅甲公司会计账簿等资料。诉讼中，甲公司提出了李某在其他同类公司中参股投资的证据以及李某放弃知情权的证据。据此，下列哪些选项是正确的？(2022-回忆版-多)

A 李某应先向甲公司主张查阅，被拒绝后才可以起诉

B 李某有权查阅甲公司的会计账簿

C 李某有权行使高额的分红权

D 甲公司以李某兼具具有不正当目的为由拒绝提供查阅，能够得到法院支持

第15题 益成有限责任公司有股东三人，安盛公司持股51%，吴海公司和陈某都是小股东。2018年3月起，益成公司未分配利润。2023年6月，安盛公司欲向外人转让其持有的股权，为确定股权价格，安盛公司提出查阅益成公司的有关财务文件。同时，吴海公司要求益成公司收购其股权。对此，下列哪一选项是正确的？(2023-回忆版-单)

A 若益成公司拒绝安盛公司的查账请求，则安盛公司可向法院申请查阅益成公司会计原始凭证

B 因涉及商业秘密，安盛公司只能查阅益成公司会计账簿，不能查阅会计原始凭证

C 益成公司5年未分配利润的，吴海公司要求收购股权可以得到法院支持

D 安盛公司查阅会计账簿的目的是转让股权的，益成公司有权拒绝

第16题 嘉茂有限责任公司成立于2020年，夏某是持股0.8%的股东。嘉茂公司收购了华兴公司85%的股权，嘉茂公司和华兴公司的法定代表人（董事）由同一人担任。现嘉茂公司欲处置华兴公司的资产，嘉茂公司的控股股东未予理会。夏某认为该处置会损害嘉茂公司的利益，遂请求查阅嘉茂公司和华兴公司2023年的财务会计报告。对此，下列哪一选项是正确的？(2024-回忆版-单)

A 夏某查阅公司财务会计报告须书面说明查阅目的

B 夏某只持有嘉茂公司0.8%的股权，无权查阅嘉茂公司的财务会计报告

C 夏某无权查阅华兴公司的财务会计报告

D 夏某作为股东，可委托嘉茂公司查阅华兴公司的财务会计报告

【English Version】

Topic 1: General Provisions of Company Law

The following is the complete verbatim original text of Topic 1: General Provisions of Company Law from the Systematic Intensive Lectures in this notebook:

Topic 1: General Provisions of Company Law

I. The Concept and Characteristics of a Company

Knowledge Point 001: The Concept and Characteristics of a Company ★

1. The concept of a company. A company is an enterprise legal person, possessing independent legal-person property and enjoying rights in that legal-person property. A company shall be liable for the company's debts with all of its property.

2. The characteristics of a company. (1) Legal-person character. A company falls within the category of "legal person" among civil subjects. A company has independent legal-person property and bears independent liability. Pursuant to Article 59 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, the capacity for civil rights and the capacity for civil conduct of a legal person arise upon the establishment of the legal person and are extinguished upon the termination of the legal person. (2) Associational character. A company is an organisation formed by shareholders contributing capital. (3) Profit-making character. A company is a profit-making legal person, established for the purpose of obtaining profits and distributing them to shareholders and other contributors. [Xuanzhan Note] Note: Although partnership enterprises and sole-proprietorship enterprises are also profit-making enterprises, they fall within the category of "unincorporated organisations".

Knowledge Point 002: The Principle of Shareholders' Limited Liability ★

1. The principle of limited liability means that a shareholder of a limited liability company shall be liable to the company up to the amount of capital contribution subscribed by that shareholder, and a shareholder of a company limited by shares shall be liable to the company up to the shares subscribed by that shareholder.

2. This principle exists to resolve the relationship among the three parties — "shareholder, company and creditor" — and emphasises that a "shareholder" does not directly bear the obligation to satisfy the "company's debts".

3. The basis on which a shareholder bears limited liability is the subscribed capital contribution or the subscribed shares. [Xuanzhan Note] Common mistake: this is not "paid-in capital contribution". Under the subscribed-capital system, subscribed capital ≥ paid-in capital.

[In-Class Quiz] Gao and Liu formed Xuancao Trading Limited Liability Company (hereinafter "Xuancao Company"), with a registered capital of RMB 200,000, Gao and Liu each subscribing RMB 100,000 in capital contributions. After Gao and Liu had each contributed RMB 50,000, Xuancao Company was established, and Chen was engaged as manager. Question 1: Is it correct that Xuancao Company is liable for Xuancao Company's debts up to its registered capital of RMB 200,000? Answer: Incorrect. A company shall be liable for the company's debts with all of its property, not up to its "registered capital". Question 2: Is it correct that Gao and Liu are each liable for Xuancao Company's debts up to their actually paid-in contributions of RMB 50,000? Answer: Incorrect. A shareholder is liable for the company's debts not up to the amount "actually paid in", but up to the capital contribution subscribed by each of them (RMB 100,000). Question 3: Chen is the manager of Xuancao Company and need not bear liability for Xuancao Company's debts. Answer: Incorrect. Chen is the manager of Xuancao Company and need not bear liability for Xuancao Company's debts.

Knowledge Point 003: Classification of Companies ★

1. Companies based on personal association, companies based on capital association, and companies based on both personal and capital association (an academic classification by the source of a company's credit) (1) A company based on personal association is one whose business activities are founded on the personal credit of its shareholders rather than on the amount of the company's capital. Generally, smaller enterprises place greater emphasis on "personal association". China has no companies based on personal association. (2) A company based on capital association is one whose business activities take the scale of the company's capital as the credit basis of the enterprise. Generally, larger enterprises place greater emphasis on "capital association". In China, the "company limited by shares" is a company based on capital association. (3) A company based on both personal and capital association is one whose credit basis includes not only the personal credit of its shareholders but also the capital and asset credit of the company. In China, the "limited liability company" is a company based on both personal and capital association.

2. Head office–branch and parent company–subsidiary company (an academic classification by the relationship between companies) (1) Head office–branch. A head office is a head organisation that is established in accordance with the law, exercises jurisdiction over all of the company's organisations, and possesses enterprise legal-person status. A branch is a branch organisation that is subject to the head office in terms of business, funds and personnel but does not possess legal-person status. (2) Parent company–subsidiary company. A parent company is a company that holds a certain number of shares in another company or, pursuant to an agreement, is able to control and direct such matters of the other company as personnel, finance and business. A subsidiary is a company a certain number of whose shares are controlled by another company or which is actually controlled and directed by another company pursuant to an agreement.

[Comparison]

[In-Class Quiz]

1. Please judge: A limited liability company embodies more personal association, while a company limited by shares embodies more capital association. Answer: Correct. For example, where equity in a limited liability company is transferred externally, the other shareholders enjoy a right of first refusal on equal terms, which embodies the "personal association" character of a limited liability company; the shares of a listed company may be freely transferred, which embodies the "capital association" character of a company limited by shares.

2. Please judge: A limited liability company is subject to more mandatory rules, while a company limited by shares enjoys more party autonomy through its articles of association. Answer: Incorrect. For example, provisions concerning limited liability companies frequently state "…except where the articles of association provide otherwise", which shows that they place greater emphasis on party autonomy.

3. Company A, in order to expand its market, established Branch A and Branch B respectively. Question 1: Is it correct that the person in charge of Branch A, within the scope of the branch's business, of course has the right to conclude contracts with outside parties in the name of Company A? Answer: Correct. A branch belongs to the head office and is a branch organisation of the head office. Where Branch A, within its own scope of business, concludes a contract in the name of Company A (the head office), there is nothing improper in that. Question 2: Where the property directly managed by Company A is insufficient to satisfy its debts, may Company A's creditors claim compulsory enforcement against the property of each branch? Answer: Yes. Since a branch has no independent property rights, its property should properly belong to the head office; therefore, where the property directly managed by the head office (Company A) is insufficient to satisfy its debts, it is lawful for creditors to claim satisfaction from the property of each branch.

Knowledge Point 004: Legal Representative ★★

1. Legal rules. Articles 10 and 11 of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China provide for the appointment and resignation of the legal representative and for the authority of the legal representative, and Article 35 provides for changes of the legal representative. (1) Appointment: The legal representative of a company shall, in accordance with the provisions of the articles of association, be a director who represents the company in executing company affairs or the manager. (Article 10, paragraph 1, of the Company Law) (2) Resignation: Where a director or manager serving as legal representative resigns, he or she shall be deemed to resign simultaneously as legal representative. Where the legal representative resigns, the company shall determine a new legal representative within 30 days from the date of the legal representative's resignation. (Article 10, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the Company Law) (3) Change: Where a company changes its legal representative, the application for change registration shall be signed by the new legal representative. (Article 35, paragraph 3, of the Company Law) (Emphasis: the change documents shall be signed by the newly appointed legal representative.) (4) Authority of the legal representative (Article 11 of the Company Law). ❶ Where the legal representative engages in civil activities in the name of the company, the legal consequences thereof shall be borne by the company. ❷ Restrictions imposed by the articles of association or by the shareholders' meeting on the authority of the legal representative shall not be asserted against a bona fide counterparty. ❸ Where the legal representative causes damage to another person in performing his or her duties, the company shall bear civil liability. After the company has borne civil liability, it may, in accordance with the law or the articles of association, seek recourse against the legal representative at fault. [Common mistake] On the board of directors, only a "director who represents the company in executing company affairs" may serve as legal representative. Independent directors of listed companies and outside directors of wholly state-owned companies are not directors who execute company affairs and therefore may not serve as legal representative. However, there is no such thing as an "outside manager", so a "manager" may in all cases serve as legal representative.

2. Practical difficulty: Litigation to remove a legal representative from registration and how a company may dismiss a legal representative. In practice, there are two common types of disputes concerning legal representatives. One type arises where a "nominal legal representative" tenders his or her resignation to the company but the company long delays handling change registration, seriously affecting the daily life of that legal representative (for example, being subject to restrictions on high consumption). The other type arises where a company adopts a resolution dismissing its legal representative, but the former legal representative refuses to recognise the validity of the resolution on the ground that his or her term of office has not yet expired. Such disputes may currently be handled in accordance with the following rules:

[First type] Resignation disputes (disputes over change registration or removal registration): (1) Where the legal representative sues the company as defendant, requesting confirmation that the resignation has taken effect and that the company shall handle change registration or removal of registration information, the people's court shall accept the case; (2) where the people's court orders the company to handle change registration or removal of registration information, it shall at the same time confirm that the legal representative resigned from the date on which the company received the written notice of resignation; (3) the resignation of the legal representative shall not affect the liability that he or she should bear for the period of his or her tenure.

[Second type] Dismissal disputes: (1) Where a company adopts a resolution dismissing its legal representative in accordance with laws, administrative regulations or the articles of association, the legal representative shall be dismissed from the date on which the resolution is adopted; (2) where the dismissed legal representative raises a defence on the ground that the company change registration has not been handled, the people's court shall not support it; (3) the dismissal of the legal representative shall not affect the liability that he or she should bear for the period of his or her tenure.

II. Disregard of Corporate Personality

Knowledge Point 005: Determination and Classification of Disregard of Corporate Personality ★★★

1. Prerequisite for application. The prerequisite for its application is that a shareholder of the company abuses the company's independent legal-person status and the limited liability of shareholders, evades debts, and seriously harms the interests of the company's creditors. At that point, if the principle of shareholders' limited liability were still rigidly adhered to and it were insisted that "the legal person bears independent civil liability with all of its property", an imbalance in the protection of the company's creditors would result. As a supplement to the "principle of shareholders' limited liability", company law establishes the rule of disregarding the company's independent personality, namely "disregard of corporate personality".

2. Test. Whether "disregard of corporate personality" is constituted depends critically on whether the company has an independent will and independent property, whether it has lost its independence, and whether it has become a mere instrument of the controlling shareholder.

3. Practical difficulty: How to determine that "a company has lost its independence, constituting disregard of personality". In practice, the following circumstances may be found to constitute a shareholder's abuse of the company's independent legal-person status and shareholders' limited liability, resulting in the company's independent personality being disregarded: (1) Excessive control of the company by the controlling shareholder. In practice, in determining "excessive control of the company by the controlling shareholder", the following factors shall be considered comprehensively: ① several companies are all controlled by the same controlling shareholder, and the relevant companies themselves have lost their independent will; ② improper transfers of benefits take place among the several companies; ③ the improper transfer of benefits is intended to evade the company's debts. (2) Commingling of the shareholder's property with the company's property. In practice, in determining "whether the shareholder's property is commingled with the company's property", the following factors shall be considered comprehensively: ① whether the shareholder's property can be distinguished from the company's property, which depends mainly on whether financial records have been kept; ② whether the shareholder has used the company's property without compensation or even misappropriated it; ③ whether there are circumstances such as commingling of personnel, commingling of business, or commingling of domicile. Where necessary, the people's court may, upon a party's application, determine whether commingling of property is constituted by means such as commissioning an audit. (3) The capital contributed by the shareholder to the company is manifestly inadequate. In practice, in determining "whether the capital contributed by the shareholder to the company is manifestly inadequate", the following factors shall be considered comprehensively: ① whether the capital actually contributed by the shareholder to the company is manifestly disproportionate to the risks implicit in the company's business; ② whether the shareholder has acted in bad faith, for example by causing the company to incur excessive or malicious debts, so as to shift investment risk to creditors. [Example] Company A's registered capital is RMB 100,000, but Company A enters into a contract to purchase a large commercial aircraft for a contract amount of RMB 100 million. Company A is subsequently sued by its creditors because it is unable to pay its debts. This is a typical case of "manifestly inadequate capital".

4. Classification of disregard of corporate personality. Vertical disregard of corporate personality (Figure 1): Determination: A shareholder of the company abuses the company's independent legal-person status and shareholders' limited liability, evades debts, and seriously harms the interests of the company's creditors. Liability: The aforementioned shareholder shall bear joint and several liability for the company's debts. Horizontal disregard of corporate personality (Figure 2): Determination: A shareholder uses two or more companies under its control to carry out the aforementioned conduct. Liability: Each company shall bear joint and several liability for the debts of any one of the companies. [Special note] Where "horizontal disregard of corporate personality" exists, the company's creditors are entitled, pursuant to Article 23, paragraph 1, of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China, to request that the controlling shareholder bear joint and several liability. (That is, to claim "shareholder" liability at the same time.) Figure 1: The relationship between Company Jia (the shareholder, A) and Company A: Shareholder Company Jia → commingling, control → Company A. Figure 2: The relationship among Companies A, B and C: Shareholder Company Jia → commingling, control → Company A, Company B and Company C. [Note] Vertical disregard of corporate personality: the "shareholder–company" relationship; horizontal disregard of corporate personality: the "company–company" relationship.

5. Special rule: For a one-person company, disregard of corporate personality adopts a reversal of the burden of proof. (1) Prerequisite: Limited to "one-person companies", that is, companies with only one shareholder, including one-person limited liability companies and one-person companies limited by shares; (2) Treatment: Where a shareholder cannot prove that the company's property is independent of the shareholder's own property, the shareholder shall bear joint and several liability for the company's debts. [Note] Only in the case of disregard of the personality of a "one-person company" is the burden of proof borne by the shareholder. In the case of a company that is not a one-person company (that is, a company with several shareholders), in disregard-of-personality litigation the principle of "he who asserts must prove" still applies, that is, the "company's creditor" bears the burden of proof.

6. Controversial issue: Is "reverse disregard of personality" recognised? (1) Issue: Where a shareholder abuses the company's independent legal-person status and shareholders' limited liability, should the company bear joint and several liability for the shareholder's debts? (2) Treatment: ❶ In general, there is no need for "reverse disregard of corporate personality". ❷ Exceptions: A. In the specific circumstance of commingling of personality in a "one-person company", since the boundary between the shareholder's property and the company's property is unclear and indistinguishable, an effect will arise whereby the parent and subsidiary companies bear joint and several liability for each other's debts; B. In substantive consolidation bankruptcy proceedings, the property of the parent and subsidiary companies is uniformly applied to satisfy all creditors, thereby formally producing the effect of using the subsidiary's property to satisfy the parent company's debts, which may be regarded as a case of "reverse disregard of corporate personality". Emphasis: The above circumstances are highly exceptional and should be confined to the specific circumstance of "commingling of corporate personality".

[In-Class Quiz]

1. Company Jia (A) holds 70% of the shares in Company A and appoints a person as chairman; Company B (Yi) holds 30%. Company Jia then applied all of Company A's assets to another large investment project of Company Jia. When creditor Company C (Bing) demanded repayment of the price of goods from Company A, it was discovered that Company A's assets were insufficient to satisfy the debt. Question: Should Company Jia bear liability to satisfy this debt? Should Company B bear liability to satisfy this debt? Answer: (1) Company Jia shall bear joint and several liability for satisfaction. Company Jia's shareholding ratio is as high as 70%, and it dominates and manipulates Company A's decision-making process, constituting abuse of independent legal-person status. (2) Company B has not abused the independent legal-person status and shareholders' limited liability, and need not bear joint and several liability for Company A's debts.

2. Company Jia (A) and Company A concluded an Equity Transfer Agreement, under which Company Jia transferred its 65% equity to Company A for consideration and completed the equity change registration procedures, but Company A did not fully pay the consideration. It was further found that Company A now holds 100% of the equity in Company B. Company A was unable to provide evidence proving that its property and Company B's property are independent. Company Jia sued in court, requesting that Companies A and B bear joint and several liability. Question: Should Company B bear joint and several liability for satisfaction of the debts of shareholder Company A? Answer: Company B shall bear joint and several liability for satisfaction of Company A's debts. Company A provided no evidence proving that Company B's property is independent of its own property, and the two companies should in law be regarded as a single liability subject, constituting commingling of personality.

Knowledge Point 006: Litigation Concerning Disregard of Corporate Personality ★★★

1. Where the claim has not been confirmed by an effective judgment. (1) Where a creditor's claim against the company has not been confirmed by an effective judgment, and the creditor only requests that the shareholders or other companies bear joint and several liability for the company's debts, the people's court shall explain to the creditor and inform it to add the company as a co-defendant; (2) where the creditor refuses to add the company, the court shall rule to dismiss the action.

2. Where the claim has already been confirmed by an effective judgment. (1) Where a creditor's claim against the company has been confirmed by an effective judgment, but the creditor has not, pursuant to Article 23 of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (that is, the disregard-of-personality provision), sued the shareholders or other companies to bear joint and several liability, but instead directly applies to change or add the shareholders or other companies as persons subject to enforcement, so that they bear joint and several liability for the company's debts, the people's court shall rule to dismiss the application for change or addition, and inform the creditor to institute separate proceedings. (2) Where the applicant for enforcement disagrees with that ruling, it may apply to the superior people's court for reconsideration; where it directly institutes an action raising an objection to enforcement, the people's court shall not accept it.

III. Company Resolutions

Analytical method: First analyse whether a resolution has been formed, then analyse the validity of the resolution. Steps for judging a company resolution:

Knowledge Point 007: Validity of Company Resolutions and Litigation Concerning Company Resolutions

Company resolutions may be divided into resolutions that have not been formed, valid resolutions, invalid resolutions and voidable resolutions.

[Note]

1. Where a shareholders' meeting adopts a resolution in violation of the law, conferring upon the board of directors powers that by law may only be exercised by the shareholders' meeting, or reclaiming for the shareholders' meeting powers that the law expressly provides may only be exercised by the board of directors, and a party requests confirmation that the resolution is invalid, the court shall support the request.

2. Where a shareholders' meeting or board of directors exceeds its powers and adopts a resolution on a matter that by law is not a matter for company resolution, and a party requests confirmation that the resolution is invalid, the court shall support the request.

Knowledge Point 008: Consequences of Defects in the Validity of Resolutions

Where a resolution of the shareholders' meeting or board of directors is declared invalid or revoked by a court, or is confirmed not to have been formed:

1. The company shall apply to the company registration authority to revoke any registration already effected pursuant to that resolution;

2. Civil legal relations formed by the company with a bona fide counterparty pursuant to that resolution shall not be affected.

[Example 1 – Resolution not formed] There is a material defect in the resolution procedure, and that defect means the resolution has not attained the statutory minimum consensus. (1) Company A did not convene a shareholders' meeting, and the chairman forged the signatures of all shareholders and produced a shareholders' meeting resolution replacing director Zhang. Because "no meeting was convened", that resolution is a "resolution not formed". (2) Company A convened a shareholders' meeting to discuss profit distribution, and all shareholders signed in agreement. However, after the meeting, Chairman Liu added to the resolution a clause "agreeing to provide joint and several liability guarantee for a loan of RMB 10 million from Bank A by shareholder Company B of Company A". Because that shareholders' meeting "did not vote on the guarantee matter", that guarantee resolution is a "resolution not formed". (3) The articles of association of Company A provide that a shareholders' meeting may be convened only if at least 5 persons attend. Only 2 shareholders attended. Because the minimum attendance prescribed by the articles of association was not met, the resolution adopted at that shareholders' meeting is a "resolution not formed". (4) Company A discussed a resolution to merge with Company B, and shareholders representing 30% of the voting rights agreed. Because the statutory requirement of "passage by shareholders representing more than two-thirds of the voting rights" was not met, the "resolution agreeing to the merger" adopted at that shareholders' meeting is a "resolution not formed".

[Example 2 – Valid resolution] Company A convened a shareholders' meeting to discuss an increase in registered capital. All shareholders attended this meeting and the voting was lawful, but the meeting minutes bear the signatures of major shareholder B and the minute-taker, while the other shareholders did not sign. In the absence of other circumstances, that resolution is valid.

[Example 3 – Invalid resolution] Where a shareholders' meeting of a company resolves to distribute the profits of the current year without making up the losses of the previous year, without paying taxes, and without setting aside the statutory reserve, and directly distributes dividends to shareholders, that resolution "violates mandatory provisions of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China" and is an invalid resolution. Alternatively, where the board of directors adopts a resolution distributing profits, that resolution is invalid because it "does not fall within the powers of the board of directors".

[Example 4 – Voidable resolution] At 10:00 a.m., Company A notified all shareholders that a shareholders' meeting would be held at 2:00 p.m. on the same day in the company's meeting room. Shareholder Zhang happened to be on a business trip elsewhere that day and could not return in time. Although the other shareholders voted to pass the resolution, Zhang did not accept the resolution and is entitled to request its revocation. This is a case of an unlawful meeting-convening procedure.

[Classic Case] Company A has three shareholders, A, B and C, who together form the board of directors. The articles of association provide that the board of directors enjoys powers such as dismissing the manager; that the board of directors must be attended by more than two-thirds (by number) of the directors; and that a board resolution is valid only if passed by directors representing more than two-thirds (by number) of all shareholders. One day, Company A convened a board meeting, all three directors attended, and the meeting adopted a resolution stating: "In view of the fact that general manager B, without the consent of the board of directors, privately used company funds to speculate in shares on the secondary market, causing huge losses to the company, he is hereby removed from his position as manager, effective immediately." That resolution was signed by A and C; B did not sign it. Upon investigation, there was a material discrepancy between the fact of B's private share speculation and the board's finding. Question: Is the resolution of Company A's board of directors removing B from the position of general manager valid? Answer: Valid. The content of this resolution is "the board of directors removing the general manager from office", which in itself violates neither the articles of association nor the provisions of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China, and there was no obvious defect in the convening procedure or voting method of this meeting, so the resolution is a valid resolution.

IV. Company Guarantee Resolutions and Bearing of Guarantee Liability

Knowledge Point 009: Types of Company Guarantees and Guarantee Resolution Procedures ★★★

(I) Related-party guarantees

1. Types. Related-party guarantees include: ① a company providing a guarantee for a shareholder of the company or its actual controller; ② a company providing a guarantee for a company directly or indirectly controlled by its controlling shareholder or actual controller, to which the provisions on a company's provision of related-party guarantees to outside parties shall apply by reference, except where the counterparty, after reasonable examination at the time of concluding the guarantee contract, still did not know of the aforementioned control relationship; ③ where a limited liability company provides a guarantee for another person to acquire equity in the company or its parent company, the provisions on a company's provision of related-party guarantees to outside parties shall apply by reference.

2. Resolution rules. (1) Where a company provides a related-party guarantee to an outside party, it shall do so by resolution of the shareholders' meeting. (2) The shareholder being guaranteed, or a shareholder dominated by the guaranteed actual controller, shall not participate in voting on the aforementioned matter. That matter shall be passed by more than half of the voting rights held by the other shareholders attending the meeting. (Rule excluding interested persons from voting.)

(II) Non-related-party guarantees

1. Concept. A non-related-party guarantee means a company investing in another enterprise or providing a guarantee for another person.

2. Resolution rules. (1) In accordance with the provisions of the articles of association, a resolution shall be adopted by the board of directors or the shareholders' meeting; (2) where the articles of association impose limits on the total amount of investment or guarantees or on the amount of a single investment or guarantee, those limits shall not be exceeded.

Knowledge Point 010: Five Circumstances Requiring No Guarantee Resolution ★★★

In the following five exceptional circumstances, where a company has not adopted a resolution in accordance with the aforementioned provisions, it must nevertheless bear guarantee liability:

1. A financial institution issues a letter of guarantee, or a guarantee company provides a guarantee. [Example] Company A is a small-loan joint-stock company, and providing guarantees is its main business; where Company A provides a guarantee, no company resolution need be produced.

2. A company provides a guarantee for its wholly-owned subsidiary (a one-person company) to carry out business activities. [Example] Company A invests in and establishes Company B, and all of Company B's funds derive from Company A; Company B is therefore a wholly-owned subsidiary of Company A. In that case, where Company A provides a guarantee for Company B's borrowing, no resolution of Company A's shareholders' meeting agreeing to the guarantee need be produced.

3. The guarantee contract is signed and agreed by shareholders who, individually or jointly, hold more than two-thirds of the voting rights on the guarantee matter. [Note] A "guarantee contract" ≠ a "guarantee resolution". A "guarantee contract" is a contract concluded between the guarantor and the counterparty; a "guarantee resolution" is a resolution produced internally by the company undertaking guarantee liability.

4. A one-person company (a wholly-owned subsidiary) provides a guarantee for its shareholder. [Example] Company B is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Company A (Company B is a one-person company); where Company B provides a guarantee for the borrowing of its sole shareholder, Company A, there is no need for Company B to convene a shareholders' meeting and produce a resolution agreeing to the guarantee, because Company B has only Company A as its sole shareholder and cannot satisfy the requirement of excluding the guaranteed shareholder (Company A) from voting.

5. Where a counterparty, relying on information publicly disclosed by a listed company that a guarantee matter has been approved by resolution of the board of directors or shareholders' meeting, concludes a guarantee contract with the listed company, the guarantee contract shall be effective against the listed company, and the listed company shall bear guarantee liability. [Principle] A guarantee is not a matter that a legal representative can decide alone; apart from the above five exceptional circumstances, a company resolution must serve as the basis and source of authorisation for the guarantee.

Knowledge Point 011: Handling of Ultra Vires Guarantees ★★★

1. Concept of an ultra vires guarantee. An ultra vires guarantee means that the legal representative of a company, in violation of the relevant provisions on company guarantee resolution procedures, exceeds his or her authority in representing the company in concluding a guarantee contract with a counterparty.

2. Liability of the legal representative. Where a legal representative provides a guarantee beyond his or her authority and thereby causes loss to the company, he or she shall bear liability to compensate the company.

3. Validity of the guarantee contract and bearing of liability.

[Note] Article 17 of the Interpretation on the Guarantee System: Where the principal contract is valid but a guarantee contract provided by a third party is invalid, the people's court shall distinguish different circumstances to determine the guarantor's liability to compensate: (1) Where both the creditor and the guarantor are at fault, the guarantor's liability to compensate shall not exceed one-half of the portion of the debt that the debtor is unable to satisfy; (2) where the guarantor is at fault and the creditor is not at fault, the guarantor shall bear liability to compensate for the portion of the debt that the debtor is unable to satisfy; (3) where the creditor is at fault and the guarantor is not at fault, the guarantor shall not bear liability to compensate. Where the principal contract is invalid, resulting in the invalidity of a guarantee contract provided by a third party, a guarantor who is not at fault shall not bear liability to compensate; a guarantor who is at fault shall bear liability to compensate not exceeding one-third of the portion of the debt that the debtor is unable to satisfy.

[In-Class Quiz] Company A and Bank A concluded a loan contract for RMB 1 million, and Xuancao Company provided a guarantee for that contract. Question 1: If Company A is a shareholder of Xuancao Company, and the board of directors of Xuancao Company adopted a resolution to provide a guarantee for that loan, and pursuant to that resolution, Chairman Gao of Xuancao Company concluded a guarantee contract with Bank A, which bears Chairman Gao's signature and the seal of Xuancao Company, did Bank A fulfil its duty of reasonable examination? Answer: No, it did not fulfil its duty of reasonable examination. The board resolution violated the provisions of the law, and Bank A does not constitute a bona fide party. Question 2: If Company A is not a shareholder of Xuancao Company, and the articles of association of Xuancao Company provide that a guarantee for another person requires a resolution of the shareholders' meeting, but in this instance the board of directors of Xuancao Company adopted a resolution to provide a guarantee for that loan, and pursuant to that resolution, Chairman Gao of Xuancao Company concluded a guarantee contract with Bank A, which bears Chairman Gao's signature and the seal of Xuancao Company, did Bank A fulfil its duty of reasonable examination? Answer: Yes, it did fulfil its duty of reasonable examination. A guarantee for another person may be resolved by the board of directors, and Bank A constitutes a bona fide party. Question 3: If, in the above (Question 2), the board resolution was forged or altered by legal representative Gao, or the voting procedure was unlawful, or the signature (seal) was not genuine, or the guarantee amount exceeded the statutory limit, did Bank A fulfil its duty of reasonable examination? Answer: Yes, it did fulfil its duty of reasonable examination. Bank A need only conduct a formal examination of the resolution. Question 4: If (following Question 2) Xuancao Company has evidence proving that the articles of association were submitted to Bank A together with the contract at the time of signing, did Bank A fulfil its duty of reasonable examination? Answer: No, it did not fulfil its duty of reasonable examination. Bank A does not constitute a bona fide party.

Summary: Steps for analysing company guarantees (from the creditor's perspective):

01 Summary of Frequently Tested Angles (SUMMARIZE)

1. Understanding and application of "the independence of the company" and the "principle of shareholders' limited liability". Judging whether a shareholder bears joint and several liability for the company's debts.

2. Understanding the differences between a limited liability company and a company limited by shares.

3. Distinguishing the satisfaction of debts of branches and subsidiaries. This may be summarised as: "Head office–branch, not separated; parent–subsidiary, independent."

4. The appointment, resignation and authority of the company's legal representative.

5. Determination and liability in vertical and horizontal disregard of corporate personality, and the reversal of the burden of proof in disregard of the personality of a one-person company.

6. Liability to compensate for a shareholder's abuse of shareholders' rights.

7. Determination and handling of the validity of company resolutions. First judge whether a resolution has been formed, then judge its validity. The basis is: ① whether the content of the resolution is lawful and in accordance with the articles of association; ② whether the procedure for convening the meeting and the voting method are lawful and in accordance with the articles of association.

8. Validity of company guarantee contracts and bearing of liability.

Topic 2: Establishment of a Company and Company Registration

The following is the complete verbatim original text of Topic 2: Establishment of a Company and Company Registration from the Systematic Intensive Lectures in this notebook:

Topic 2: Establishment of a Company and Company Registration

I. Establishment of a Company

Establishment of a company means the legal acts that the shareholders (promoters) at the time of establishment must adopt and complete, in accordance with statutory conditions and procedures, in order to form a company and obtain legal-person status.

Knowledge Point 012: Conditions for Establishing a Company ★★

The conditions for establishing a company include matters such as the shareholders (or promoters) at the time of establishment, registered capital, name, domicile, organisational structure, and articles of association.

1. Matters concerning promoters, etc.

[1] Treatment of registered capital of existing companies: For companies registered and established before 30 June 2024: ① where the remaining period for paying capital contributions of a limited liability company exceeds 5 years as from 1 July 2027, it shall, before 30 June 2027, adjust its remaining period for paying capital contributions to within 5 years and record it in its articles of association, and shareholders shall pay in full their subscribed capital contributions within the adjusted subscription period (3-year transition + 5-year paid-in period); ② promoters of a company limited by shares shall, before 30 June 2027, pay in full the share subscription monies for the shares subscribed by them (3-year transition). Where the period for capital contribution or the registered capital is manifestly abnormal, the company registration authority may, in accordance with the law, require the company to adjust it in a timely manner. Specific implementation measures shall be prescribed by the State Council. (Article 2, paragraph 1, and Article 3 of the Provisions of the State Council on Implementing the Registered Capital Registration Management System under the Company Law of the People's Republic of China.)

Organisational structure: A company shall have an organisational structure. (Omitted; see Topic 7, "Organisational Structure of Companies".) Articles of association: (Omitted; see below.)

1. Articles of association. (1) The articles of association are the basic legal documents that a company must have, prescribing matters such as its name, purposes, capital and organisational structure. (2) The articles of association are binding on the company, its shareholders, directors, supervisors and senior management personnel. The aforementioned persons include both the shareholders, directors, etc. at the time of establishment and the aforementioned subjects who join the company after its establishment. (3) Where a company engages in business activities beyond its articles of association, the act is valid so long as it does not violate the provisions of laws or administrative regulations. (4) Formulation and amendment of the articles of association, and provisions thereof:

[In-Class Quiz] The articles of association of Company A provide that, without authorisation from the shareholders' meeting, the chairman shall not dispose of company assets, nor conclude non-operating contracts in the name of the company. One day, Chairman Ren, seeing that Wang had bought a new BMW car, decided to exchange the company's old Mercedes-Benz car in which he rode for Wang's car, and completed the vehicle transfer registration procedures. Question: Is Ren's car-exchange act valid? Answer: The effect of the articles of association does not extend to a third party to the transaction. Where Wang is bona fide, the transaction act of Ren, the chairman of Company A, is valid. Where loss is caused to Company A, Ren shall bear liability to compensate.

1. Shareholders' agreements. (1) A shareholders' agreement means an agreement concluded between some or all shareholders. (It includes both establishment agreements concluded by shareholders at the time of establishment and agreements concluded between shareholders after the company has been established.) (2) Pursuant to the privity of contract, where an agreement concluded between some or all shareholders is neither invalid nor voidable, and a shareholder requests other shareholders to bear liability pursuant to the agreement, the court shall support the request. (3) In principle, where a shareholder asserts that the aforementioned shareholders' agreement is effective against the company, the court shall not support the assertion. Exceptional circumstances: ① all shareholders have unanimously agreed in writing on a matter for resolution by the shareholders' meeting and have signed or affixed their seals to the decision document; ② the law expressly provides that an agreement of all shareholders is effective against the company; etc.

Knowledge Point 013: Liability Arising from Establishment of a Company ★★

1. Validity of contracts. The validity of contracts concluded during the establishment stage of a company shall be judged in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China.

2. Contractual liability. (1) Where shareholders at the time of establishment of a limited liability company (promoters of a company limited by shares) engage in civil activities for the purpose of establishing the company, the legal consequences thereof shall be borne by the company. (2) Where a company has not been established, the legal consequences shall be borne by the shareholders (promoters) at the time of establishment; where there are two or more shareholders (promoters) at the time of establishment, they shall enjoy joint claims and bear joint debts. (3) Where shareholders (promoters) at the time of establishment engage in civil activities in their own names for the purpose of establishing the company, the resulting civil liability may, at the third party's option, be claimed against the company or against the shareholders (promoters) at the time of establishment.

[In-Class Quiz] A, B, C and D proposed to establish a trading company, dividing responsibility for establishment matters among themselves, with C responsible for leasing a warehouse needed for the company's operations. Since the company had not yet been established, C, for convenience in concluding the contract, concluded a warehouse lease contract in his own name with E. Question: How should that rent debt and liability be borne? Answer: After the trading company is established, E has the option to require either C to bear liability or the trading company to bear liability.

(4) Where shareholders (promoters) at the time of establishment engage in civil activities in the name of a company in the course of establishment, and the counterparty requests the company to bear civil liability, the court shall support the request in accordance with the law, except where the company can prove that the civil activity is unrelated to the establishment of the company. ❶ Where the purpose of engaging in the civil activity is to "establish the company", the company shall bear civil liability. ❷ Where the civil activity is unrelated to the establishment of the company, the shareholders (promoters) at the time of establishment shall bear civil liability. For example, where promoter Zhang San concluded a house lease contract, although it was concluded in the name of the "Xuancao Company Preparatory Group", the house was for Zhang San's own residence and unrelated to the establishment of Xuancao Company, the house rent shall be borne by promoter Zhang San, not by the company. ❸ Where shareholders (promoters) at the time of establishment engage in civil activities in the name of a company in the course of establishment, the company has not been established, and the counterparty requests other promoters to bear joint liability, the court shall support the request in accordance with the law, except where the other promoters can prove that the civil activity is unrelated to the establishment of the company.

1. Tort liability. Where shareholders at the time of establishment cause damage to another person in performing their company-establishment duties, the company or a shareholder not at fault, after bearing liability to compensate, may seek recourse against the shareholder at fault.

Knowledge Point 014: Methods of Establishing a Company [1]

[1] A company limited by shares may be established by promotion or by public offering; the Company Law of the People's Republic of China does not prescribe a method of establishment for a limited liability company.

1. Establishment by promotion. (1) Concept: Establishment by promoters subscribing for all the shares to be issued at the time of establishment of the company. (2) Procedure: ❶ Promoters shall subscribe for the shares to be issued at the time of establishment of the company as prescribed by the articles of association; ❷ promoters shall pay in full, before the establishment of the company, the share subscription monies for the shares subscribed by them.

2. Establishment by public offering ★★. (1) Concept: Establishment by promoters subscribing for part of the shares to be issued at the time of establishment of the company, with the remaining shares offered to specific persons or to the public. (2) Procedure:

[Circumstances for refund of share subscription monies] Where any of the following circumstances arises, subscribers may require the promoters to refund the share subscription monies paid, together with interest calculated at the bank deposit rate for the corresponding period: (1) The shares to be issued at the time of establishment of the company have not been fully subscribed; (2) after the share subscription monies for the shares issued have been paid in full, the promoters have not convened the inaugural meeting within 30 days; (3) the inaugural meeting resolves not to establish the company.

[Common mistakes]

1. The articles of association are "formulated" by the promoters and "adopted" by the inaugural meeting.

2. The object of capital verification: verifying the share subscription monies of outside subscribers raised by public offering; the object examined by the inaugural meeting: examining the promoters' non-monetary capital contributions.

[In-Class Quiz] Companies A and B propose to establish a company limited by shares by public offering. Which of the following acts carried out by them after obtaining approval to offer shares to the public are unlawful? (2006/3/71) [1] A. The subscription form states: Once a subscriber subscribes for shares, the subscription may not be withdrawn. B. A share underwriting and share subscription monies collection agreement was concluded with a bank, under which the bank sells shares on behalf of the company and collects share subscription monies on its behalf. C. The prospectus states: The articles of association are jointly formulated by the promoters at the inaugural meeting. D. The prospectus states: The inaugural meeting will be convened within 60 days after the share subscription monies have been paid in full. [1] ABCD

Knowledge Point 015: Change of Company Form ★

1. Concept. Change of company form means a change from a limited liability company to a company limited by shares, or from a company limited by shares to a limited liability company.

2. Specific requirements. (1) Both must satisfy the conditions of the company after the change (that is, the conditions for establishing a company). Where a limited liability company changes to a company limited by shares and increases its registered capital by publicly issuing shares, it shall be handled in accordance with the law. (2) Both must be passed by vote of the shareholders' meeting. (3) Claims and debts of the company before the change shall be succeeded to by the company after the change.

3. Special provision. Where a limited liability company changes to a company limited by shares, the total amount of actually paid-in share capital into which it is converted shall not exceed the net asset value of the company. Net asset value = total assets − liabilities. For example, where a company's total assets are RMB 10 million, of which bank loans amount to RMB 2 million, its net assets are RMB 8 million.

II. Company Registration

Knowledge Point 016: Company Registration Matters and Matters Subject to Public Disclosure

[Common mistakes]

1. The Company Law of the People's Republic of China as revised in 2023 added a requirement to disclose shareholders' "amount of capital contribution, manner of capital contribution and date of capital contribution". (The former Company Law of the People's Republic of China only required disclosure of shareholders' "names".)

2. A company limited by shares need only register and disclose relevant information concerning "promoters", not "all shareholders" — for example, shareholders of a listed company need not all be disclosed.

3. The names of shareholders (promoters) and the name of the legal representative require both registration and public disclosure.

Knowledge Point 017: Types of Company Registration and Registration Procedures ★

Company registration is divided into three types: establishment registration, change registration and cancellation registration.

[In-Class Quiz] A municipal state-owned assets management department decided to revoke two wholly state-owned companies, A and B, and merge them to establish Company A, a company limited by shares, which still uses the trade name of the former Company A. That merger has been approved by the relevant department, and commercial registration is now to be handled. To which type of registration does the commercial registration of Company A, a company limited by shares, belong? [1] A. Merger registration B. Establishment registration C. Change registration D. Cancellation registration [1] B

III. Shareholders' Rights to Inspect and Copy (Right to Know)

Shareholders have the right to inspect or copy specific documents and materials of the company; this right is the basis for shareholders to exercise other rights. If shareholders cannot understand the company's meeting records or the company's financial position, they cannot assert other rights such as dividends. However, while protecting shareholders' right to know, it is also necessary to prevent shareholders from arbitrarily interfering with the company's independent operations and causing unnecessary harm to the company's operations. Therefore, the Company Law of the People's Republic of China both provides for shareholders' rights to inspect and copy, and imposes necessary restrictions on shareholders' exercise of that right.

Knowledge Point 018: Content of Shareholders' Right to Know

[2] Accounting books include detailed accounts, general ledgers, etc., which can concretely and directly reflect the company's operating position. Accounting vouchers include source vouchers and bookkeeping vouchers. Pursuant to Article 14, paragraphs 2 and 5, of the Accounting Law of the People's Republic of China, in handling economic business matters, source vouchers must be prepared or obtained and promptly delivered to the accounting institution. Bookkeeping vouchers shall be prepared on the basis of source vouchers that have been examined and relevant materials.

Knowledge Point 019: Practical Difficulties in Disputes over Shareholders' Right to Know

1. Must the plaintiff in a right-to-know action necessarily be a shareholder? (1) Plaintiff: Where a shareholder, pursuant to company law or the articles of association, requests to inspect or copy specific documents and materials of the company, and at the time of bringing the action does not possess shareholder status, the people's court shall not accept the case; however, where the plaintiff has preliminary evidence proving that his or her lawful rights and interests were harmed during the period of shareholding, he or she may bring a right-to-know action. (That is, although not a shareholder at the time of bringing the action, he or she may "look back".) (2) Defendant: The company.

[In-Class Quiz] Xuancao Limited Liability Company was established in 2016 and has never paid a dividend to shareholders since, and owes large amounts of debt externally. In May 2021, Dali, believing the company had no development prospects, sold his equity to an outsider, A. In June 2023, Dali learned in another action that Xuancao Limited Liability Company's operating position over the past several years had in fact been very good, but Dali's fellow shareholder and chairman Wei had concealed operating income and transferred company property. Question: May Dali request to inspect the company's accounting books after May 2021? Answer: No. However, Dali is entitled to request to inspect the company's accounting books before May 2021.

1. May a shareholder directly bring a right-to-know action? Where a shareholder has not provided preliminary evidence proving that he or she has submitted a written request to the company to inspect or excerpt the company's accounting books and accounting vouchers and has been refused, and directly requests to inspect or excerpt accounting books and accounting vouchers, the people's court shall not accept the case.

2. How is "improper purpose" determined? In judicial practice, where a company adduces evidence proving that a shareholder applied to inspect or excerpt accounting books and accounting vouchers for any of the following purposes, it may generally be found that the shareholder has an "improper purpose": (1) The shareholder's own business has a substantive competitive relationship with the company's main business, except where the articles of association provide otherwise or all shareholders have agreed otherwise; (2) the shareholder applied for inspection in order to disclose relevant information to another person, and such disclosure is not an obligation that the shareholder is required to perform under laws or administrative regulations; (3) other circumstances in which the shareholder has an improper purpose.

[In-Class Quiz] Dali is a shareholder of Xuancao Limited Liability Company and also serves as general manager of Baiguo Limited Liability Company. It is known that Xuancao Limited Liability Company and Baiguo Limited Liability Company both engage in the fast-food chain business. Question: May Xuancao Limited Liability Company refuse Dali's request to inspect the accounts on the ground that Dali serves as general manager of Baiguo Limited Liability Company? Answer: Yes. Because the two companies have a "substantive competitive relationship", this is a case of "a shareholder's inspection of accounts having an improper purpose".

1. May the articles of association restrict shareholders' right to know? (1) Where the articles of association, agreements between shareholders, etc. substantively deprive shareholders of their rights under company law to inspect or copy relevant documents and materials of the company, and a shareholder requests confirmation that the relevant provisions or agreements are invalid and requests to inspect or copy relevant documents and materials of the company, the people's court shall support the request; (2) where the articles of association, agreements between shareholders, etc. reasonably restrict or expand shareholders' rights under company law to inspect or copy relevant documents and materials of the company, and a shareholder asserts the right to know pursuant thereto, the people's court shall support the assertion.

02 Summary of Frequently Tested Angles (SUMMARIZE)

1. The maximum period for shareholders of a limited liability company to pay capital contributions is "within 5 years from the date of establishment of the company".

2. To whom are the articles of association binding? Emphasis: The articles of association are not binding on creditors or employees. Creditors and the company determine the validity of contracts pursuant to civil law, etc., and employees and the company determine their legal relationship pursuant to labour contracts.

3. Validity of contracts during the company establishment stage and the subjects bearing liability for satisfaction. When judging who bears liability, consider "in whose name, for whose substance".

4. Specific procedures for establishment by public offering.

5. Types of company registration and matters requiring public disclosure.

6. The 2023 Company Law of the People's Republic of China added a new rule that "shareholders of a company limited by shares who satisfy the conditions are entitled to inspect the company's accounting books and accounting vouchers".

7. Whether a company's refusal of a shareholder's request to inspect accounts on the ground of "improper purpose" is lawful.