Judicial Intervention Towards The Company's Defective Resolution

This paper studies and discusses the judicial intervention of the company's defective resolution.Based on the elaboration of the basic theory of the company's defective resolution and judicial intervention,it analyzes the rationality of the judicial intervention in the company's defective resolution,combs the judicial cases in recent years,and analyzes them from the whole and the case in an all-round way.After the analysis,it further explores the controversial focus of the case At the end of the chapter,the author puts forward some suggestions to solve the problem of judicial intervention.The first chapter introduces the concept,type and legal effect of the company defect resolution.The types,contents and procedural defects of the company's defective resolution distinguish the legal effect of dichotomy and trisection from that of unincorporated resolution.Starting from the background of judicial intervention,this paper introduces the concept of judicial intervention.Analyze the reasons for supporting and opposing judicial intervention,and summarize the relevant principles to be followed in intervention: prudent intervention,classified treatment after intervention,efficiency priority,procedure as the main entity supplemented.The second chapter is to analyze the rationality of judicial intervention in the resolution of corporate defects.After the collection of relevant data from China's judicial document network,the litigation of the company's defective resolution has increased significantly.Combined with the current situation that other intervention forces are too weak,it confirms the actual needs of judicial intervention in the company's defective resolution.In order to maintain the internal interests of the company and the interests of the third party,realize the judicial function,maintain the judicial order,and protect the judicial value,judicial intervention in the resolution of corporate defects has dual rationality in reality and theory.The third chapter is an empirical case study of defective resolution.First of all,from the overall analysis,the main body of the lawsuit,the cause of the lawsuit,the reasons for the judgment as the starting point,the overall data statistics.China's provisions on the subject are listed in a positive way.Combined with the losing rate of the whole case,this paper analyzes the cause of action and the reason of judgment,and makes an empirical analysis from the overall data of judgment.After the overall analysis,three typical cases are selected to summarize the relevant focus issues fromthe claims of the original defendant and the reason of judgment of the court.The fourth chapter is the analysis of judicial intervention in the resolution of corporate defects.The fourth chapter starts from two aspects.In terms of system,the principle provisions of law are lack of corresponding rules and details guidance,the boundary of judicial intervention is vague,the plaintiff is not clear,and the legal effect of judicial intervention in the resolution of corporate defects.In practice,it is mainly the way and attitude of the court in the process of intervention.The intervention of the court is the issue of value measurement.Because of the low cost of prosecution,abuse of litigation often occurs.In terms of legal effect,how effective the judicial judgment is and whether it can produce effect in the process of subsequent company resolutions are analyzed.The fifth chapter is the Countermeasures of judicial intervention of company defect resolution.From the improvement of the system and practical operation put forward targeted solutions.Perfect and refine the law,establish the system of discretionary rejection,specifically distinguish the qualifications of the plaintiff,and increase the legal effect of judicial intervention in the resolution of corporate defects.In practice,expand the intervention channels and establish non litigation relief channels.In the process of intervention,the court should hold the attitude of prudent intervention,pay attention to the value measurement between the company and the judiciary,improve litigation guarantee,and adopt different guarantee standards for different defective resolutions to reduce the abuse of litigation.