Study On Judicial Mandatory Dissolution Institution

Judicial compulsory disbandment of company has been paid the great attention since the company law was enacted in China. The system maintains the interests of minority shareholders and it can also lead to the dissolution of the company, so it should be used cautiously. Through interpretation of the specific case, focusing on application of the substantial conditions of judicial dissolution of a company. Through interpretation of the specific cases, problem of scarce legal particular matters of judicial dissolution in judicial dissolution system is found. May this work draw more scholars' and experts' attention to these problems. This thesis consists of three parts: introduction, main body and conclusion. The main body is divided into the following six parts.The first one, case introduction, the focus of controversy and the induction of the court. The content discussed in this article, namely, the application of the substantive conditions of the judicial dissolution of the company starts with the case of a dissolution dispute. Fitness of the qualification of the plaintiff, serious difficulties of defendant management, the defendant existence losing shareholders' interests. Whether or not the plaintiff actively taking other measures to relief their rights and interests, this article discusses the above four topics in order.The second part, discussion of whether the plaintiff is in accordance with the subject qualification of the judicial dissolution litigation. In the company legal relationship, the legal relationship of the subject is often complicated. This part, whether the shareholders who are not actually fulfilling their obligation of contribution have the subject qualification for the judicial dissolution of the company is discussed in this part. On the basis of the theoretical knowledge of the case, analyseing whether the shareholders who are not actually fulfilling their obligation of contribution have the subject qualification for the judicial dissolution of the company.The third part, discussion of whether the defendant(DA SHAN company) has difficulties in managing. Firstly, judging "difficulties in managing", the premise of the company judicial dissolution litigation and elaborating scarce legal particular matters of judicial dissolution in judicial dissolution system and difficult to realize the rights and maintain interests of minority shareholders. On the basis of the above theory, judging whether DA SHAN company has difficulties in managing. After distinguishing “having not hold a meeting of shareholders” and “unable to hold a meeting of shareholders”, we can get the conclusion that the defendant is not shareholders deadlock caused by difficulties in its operation and management.The fourth part: Discussion is about the interests of the accused continues to exist whether shareholders would cause significant losses.First is shareholders invested company expected benefits are discussed,then combined with the actual situation of dashan company whether the plaintiff shareholders' equity will be losed in the company continues to exist will be analyzed,finally it is concluded that the defendant to continue surviving not resulting in serious losses to the plaintiff shareholders' interests.The fifth part:It is the plaintiff shareholders whether to adopt other ways to remedy their rights were discussed.First is elaborate our country's current legislation lack of diversification Relief way,Then combined with the current legislation to elaborate shareholders can use what “other way”.Then combined with three of the plaintiff shareholders whether it is doing his best to use the other way to remedy their rights,Finally it is concluded that the plaintiff shareholders did not end end other solution.The sixth part:It is to the evaluation of court referee's and obtain court should make what sentence.First of all, according to the above dashan company is in line with the judicial dissolution of the referee of the substantive conditions on the court,finally concluded that the company should not be disbanded referee conclusions.