公司多數決下的股東直接訴權－兼評最高法院101年度台上字第1650號民事判決

股東直接訴訟係相對於股東代表訴訟之制度，我國學者多有談及，惟鮮有專文討論，本文試圖從英國法與美國法的比較法論證股東直接訴訟存在的應然基礎。英國法受Foss原則影響存在禁止反射損害原則，美國法則以個別損害原則稱之，兩者性質相近，主要在於妥當劃分股東個人權利與公司權利之間的界線，以避免股東直接訴訟所可能產生的「反多數決困境」，而值得一提英國2006年公司法透過不公平侵害救濟制度提供股東較一般性的個人救濟管道。本文參考英國、美國文獻，認為股東直接訴訟可分為三種類型，契約類型、侵權類型與法定類型，藉由公司法、證券交易法的重新檢視，提出更一般抽象之原則，釐清我國法下股東直接訴訟的基本體系。

關鍵字

股東直接訴權；反射損害；個別損害；少數股東；不公平侵害

並列摘要

The shareholders' direct action, opposite to the derivative actions, has been mentioned by the scholars in Taiwan, but rarely discussed in detail. This paper aims to discuss the theory of shareholders' direct actions in the method of comparative law study. The UK case law, affected by the Foss rule, uses the concept of ＂no reflective loss principle＂; while the US case law uses the concept of ＂the specific injuries＂. These two concepts are very similar. They are all used to distinct and separate the shareholders' personal interest from the corporation in order to avoid the ＂anti-majority＂ dilemma. One thing, however, should be mentioned is that UK Company Act 2006 s994 provides shareholder with unfair prejudicial remedies. This paper, inspired by the discussions in UK and US law, divides the shareholders' direct actions into three categories, which are contract, tort, and statutory rights, respectively. By re-examining the Company Act and Securities Exchange Act in Taiwan, this paper extracts more general principles from the law in Taiwan, in the hope of establishing the system of shareholders' direct actions.