Study On Judicial Intervention Of Shareholders’ Right To Dividends

As an important form for shareholders to get income from investment company,surplus distribution is an important job in the day-to-day operation of the company.However,there is a phenomenon in judicial practice that the company has a distributable surplus,but for some purpose it does not allocate the surplus.Otherwise,due to the distribution of surplus belongs to the internal autonomy of the company and the absence of relevant legislation in our country,the cases of shareholders’ mandatory surplus distribution may have the same details but bring different rulings in the judicial practice,which seriously affecting the rights of small shareholders and the company’s daily business.Therefore,it is great importance to clear whether the judicial involvement in corporate earnings distribution litigation and how to intervene.This article starts from combing 1,634 cases which happed from January 1,2006 to December 31,2016 to clear the judicial position of the company’s surplus distribution case and the reasons for the courts to support or not support shareholders’mandatory surplus distribution.And on this basis,I will analyze the nature of shareholders’ right to dividends and the conflict of interest and the measure of interest involved from the perspective of interest measurement.Then,I will give judicial suggestions about the judicial intervention of shareholders’ right to dividends on base of analyzing the justification of judicial intervention in surplus distribution.Specifically,this article consists of three parts:introduction,text and conclusion.The introduction part mainly elaborates the basic characteristic of theorists of shareholders ’ right to dividends and attitude of judicial practice and theorists about it.And I will give the significance of studying on shareholders’ right to dividends.The text section can be divided into four parts.The first part,I will comb the typical case of shareholder mandatory surplus allocation request.Through the analysis of 12 typical cases,I will give the reasons and trial thinking for the courts to support or not support shareholders’ mandatory surplus distribution.Due to different judicial standards and judges have different values,some same details of cases bring about different rulings,which is focus of discussion in this article.The second part,nature of shareholders’ right to dividends and conflict of related rights.I will start from the nature of shareholders’ right to dividends to analyze its attributes and characteristics.And on this basis,I will use perspective of interest measurement to analyze the specific interests of the parties,group interests,institutional benefits and social public interest,which related to shareholders’ right to dividends.Then,I will comb the conflicts of interest involved and the measure of interest.The third part,legitimacy analysis of judicial intervene in shareholders’ right to dividends.After analyzing legal nature of shareholders’ right to dividends,I will analyze the legitimacy of judicial intervene in shareholders’ right to dividends from angle of loss of loyalty obligation of controlling shareholder,internal governance requirements of the company,claims for rights and judicial initiative.And through a comparative study of successful experiences over domains to clear that in some cases the administration of justice should be involved in the distribution of corporate surplus.The fourth part,suggestions on the judicial involvement of shareholders in China.In the preceding article has been clear that the judicial should be conditional intervention in the company under the premise of the distribution of earnings surplus and combined with judicial jurisprudence,I will give judicial advice of the choice of intervention principle,judgment of judicial intervention boundary,judicial thinking and intervention mode when the judicial involvement in the company’s surplus distribution.It maybe can provide reference for the relevant judicial trial.In the conclusion part,I review the full text.It is hoped that the administration will involve the distribution of corporate surplus under certain conditions.In the balance of corporate autonomy under the premise of the shareholders to claim the right to compensation for the distribution of relief,which may better optimize the allocation of social resources,reflecting the role of judicial dispute.