Research On The Judicial Intervention Into Company Autonomy

The Principle of private law autonomy is very important in business law, there isa prominent manifestation in new company law, and specific performance is companyautonomy and autonomy rights. The Company Law regulates company’s operations;companies were given a wide of autonomy. Compared with previous company law,it’s a great progress. Theoretical foundation of company autonomy contain the theoryof private law autonomy and company contract, the theory of private law autonomythink that company has own personality, so according to their own will to conducteconomic activities. And the people who hold the theory of company conduct thinksthat company could be seen as the result of relationship of contract, it’s the result ofparties who reach an agreement, and it provides legitimacy for company autonomy. Intheory, judicial power can’t intervene into company autonomy.With rapid economic development, make the current economic activities tendto complex. So there are many problems appeared in company operations, someproblems can’t be solved by company autonomy, and then there must be a kind ofexternal force to intervene into company, in this paper, the study of this power isjudicial power. It seems that there is a contradiction between jurisdictioninterventions with company autonomy. There is different point about Whether thejurisdiction intervene into company or not.the people who support intervention thinkthat if appeared problems in company operations, it’s not enough to solve thisproblems by internal forces, so it needs external forces to regulate, through thejudicial power, it can make company out of stuck, when the company will fall incrisis, judicial power intervene into company in advance can make the loss to aminimum. The people who object jurisdiction intervention think that jurisdictionintervention disobey the principle of company autonomy, it’s a harm to companyautonomy, because the attribute of the company law tend to private law, the otherreason of opposition is company operation is a kind of commercial behaviors, thisbehavior must depend on manager’s business experience, for example, the businessdecision is made by shareholders or manager, and the judge haven’t business experience, they only good at law, and have no experience on commercial activity.soit’s not appropriate that judge intervene into company operation.This paper also introduces the current and necessity of jurisdiction interventioninto company autonomy. compared with previous company law, the space ofcompany autonomy extend, restrict the judicial power, but, the program ofintervention is not complete, and the operability is bad, in practice, many judges haveless experience relate to case of company, because, it’s not only about law, but alsorelate to business behavior, lead to judge can’t handle this kind of case.We must master the right opportunity, when judicial power intervene intocompany, choose right time to intervene, too early or too late is not appropriate. thepurpose of jurisdiction intervention is to solve companies’ problem, make companyrun well, it demand judges exercise their judicial power in a narrow range and focuson procedural intervention, substantive intervention should be avoid. Excessiveintervention against the purpose of jurisdiction intervention. The way of interventionconclude shareholder’s derivative suit and shareholder’s suit. Elaborate connectionand distinction between shareholder’s derivative suit and shareholder’s suit.The point of this paper is nether let company run freely, nor let judicial powerintervene into company in a large-scale. We must find the balance point betweencompany autonomy and jurisdiction intervention. The judge must make full sense ofcompany law, to be a good judge, emphasize the important of legal interpretation andflexible principle of judge, limited intervention. Achieve the balance betweencompany autonomy and jurisdiction intervention.