The Study Of Litigation Fee In Shareholder’s Derivative Action

The Company Law of the People’s Republic of China was approved by the 18th National People’s Congress Standing Committee Meeting on October 27,2005, which was put into effect formally on January 1st,2006. New terms that protect the interests of minority shareholders were revised and added to the new company law. And this would play a positive role for the protection of the interests of minority shareholders of the company. With the rapid development of china’s economy and the continuous growth of the company, the minority shareholders play an increasingly important role in the company although they are not in a high status. From the view of legal equal value, the vulnerable group of minority shareholders shall be protected.The foreign company legislations are relatively mature and complete with a long history of development, from which we can learn much. In this article, the legislations of Britain, Japan, and the United States about litigation fee relating to Shareholder’s Derivative Action will be compared and analyzed in a comparative analysis method. It is worthy us to learn the completeness and feasibility of their company law legislation, especially Japan and the United States. In these two country’s company law, the exercise of the qualifications of each of the rights or obligations, method, time, location as well as the exceptions all are stated detailed and concisely.According to the reality of our situation, the Shareholder’s Derivative Action System has just established with little practical experience. Compared to the situation in the United States, our Shareholder’s Derivative Action are not too many, but too few. In some rural areas, grassroots courts are not even been filed a Shareholder’s Derivative Action. This is because the cost and benefit for a shareholder to sue a suit is not disproportionate in real life, which greatly weakened the enthusiasm of minority shareholders to sue the suits. While in the company practice, the situations where amusement of right by company directors, executives and major shareholders’rights are infringed upon the interests of the company are prevalent. Thus, there is an urgent need to restrain by Shareholder’s Derivative Action proceedings. In above, the primary task of current China’s legislation and judicial practice is not to limit the Shareholder’s Derivative Action, but to lift the obstacles of the cost of litigation, to enhance shareholder’s incentive for derivative litigation, and to guide the shareholders to file a lawsuit to maintain the interests of the company. In order to prevent the Shareholder’s Derivative Action from being a mere fly on the wheel, resulting in shareholders are reluctant to move forward the litigation, too many restrictions shall not be put to this litigation.Shareholder’s Derivative Action was not born in China, however, its birthplace is not important. It is important for it to grow, develop and play its role in China. This article will mainly study the points that are not involved in the new company law: litigation fee of Shareholder’s Derivative Action, litigation costs and compensation based on study abroad advanced legislation and analysis of domestic real situation about Shareholder’s Derivative Action proceedings, and give reasonable legislation suggestions in order to improve our legislation.This article is divided into five parts:the introduction is to sort out and analyze the existing relevant papers and books, and point out the purpose and significance of this writing.The first chapter is to analyze Sino-US court cases of Shareholder’s Derivative Action and point out that it is essential for china to frame the litigation fee rules.The second chapter mainly study and analyze how the case acceptance fee ruled in foreign countries and give reasonable consolation that China shall recommend the advanced legislation experience.The third chapter mainly analyzes the reasonableness of litigation fee compensation right in foreign countries, and then analyze that it is feasible to recommend this right for the plaintiff in China.The last part is the summary, which gives the conclusion of the full text and makes reasonable suggestions.