Research On The Execution Objection Of Hidden Shareholders In The Process Of Executive Shareholding

In recent years,with the continuous development of my country's economy,new changes have taken place in the company's investment methods.Among them,the anonymous investment method is typical and presents an increasing trend.This connection method using the equity holding agreement as a link has caused a large number of equity disputes in the course of practice,not only involving the parties,but even involving the third party.people.In the field of enforcement,there are also inevitable cases involving anonymous shareholders who dispute the disputed equity.However,my country's company law does not clearly regulate this anonymous investment method.The legal gaps lead to confusion in judicial practice,and even different judgments in the same case.Through the analysis of typical cases that have occurred in recent years,it is found that when the court judges similar cases,the same clause is applied to the question of "whether an anonymous shareholder can apply to the court for enforcement against the creditors of the nominal shareholder".Thought,found that the focus of the court's disputes are mainly concentrated in the following aspects:First,the application of the third paragraph of Article 32 of the "Company Law".The main controversy that emerged when this clause was used as the basis for adjudication was whether the creditors of the nominal shareholders were the category of "third parties"as referred to in this law,and whether the principles of commercial appearanceism embodied in this law were applicable to the obligatory enforcement process of anonymous equity.Second,the application of the first paragraph of Article 25 of the Judicial Interpretation of Company Law(3).Interpretation of this paragraph directly leads the court to refer to the application of the good faith acquisition system for the handling of disputes over anonymous equity.However,whether the anonymous equity entered into the enforcement procedure is special or the universal good faith acquisition system also needs further analysis and demonstration.Third,the refereeing will be conducted in accordance with the validity of the equity holding agreement.Can an anonymous shareholder use the real and effective "shareholding agreement" as a reason to oppose court enforcement?What should be the nature of the equity holding agreement?Is it a trust relationship,agency relationship,or ordinary contract relationship?Under such a premise,to study the objections of hidden shareholders in the process of executing shareholdings,first of all,it is necessary to clarify the type of obligatory shareholder enforcement,that is,in the process of executing shareholdings,the creditors of nominal shareholders apply for the execution of nominal shareholders.As for the equity under the name,the unnamed shareholder filed a lawsuit against the court as an outsider for the execution of the objection,and considered it as the actual right holder of the equity involved in the case,and requested the court to stop the mandatory enforcement of the equity involved in the case.Secondly,with regard to the focus of the dispute,a theoretical analysis is centered around the principles of commercial appearanceism,the system for obtaining equity in good faith and the nature of the equity holding agreement.On the one hand,it is necessary to support the principle of commercial appearanceism to adjust the issue of anonymous equity disputes,to include creditors of nominal shareholders into the category of third parties,and to further affirm the application of Article 32,paragraph 3 of the Company Law.On the other hand,it is also necessary to deny the reference application of the stock goodwill acquisition system in the issue of anonymous equity disputes,and to determine that the occurrence of the goodwill acquisition should not be in the execution procedure.Finally,the nature of the equity holding agreement is analyzed.Supporting the equity holding agreement is an unnamed contract voluntarily established between the parties.It is only valid internally and cannot be opposed to an external third party.The analysis and argumentation of the basis of refereeing is conducive to the clear application of laws and regulations,and it also provides a more uniform legal basis for the refereeing standards of cases,better protects the lawful rights and interests of parties in dispute,establishes judicial authority,and enhances the fairness and justice of the law.