論資產收購之繼受人責任－以商品責任承擔為中心

Successor Liability In Asset Acquisitions－From the Perspective of Product Liability

江昂軒(ANG-XUAN JIANG)

指導教授 ： 陳春山

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系一般生組/碩士(2014年)

摘要

以資產收購而論，其中最重要的特點在於「無繼受人責任」，即選擇以收購方式購買他公司資產時，因僅係單純取得資產，被收購公司原所應負之一切顯在及潛在債務或責任，收購者皆無須繼受，是具有可控制風險之優點，然而各種事物有其一體兩面，在企業經營者所提供商品流通進入市場，因未符合當時科技或專業水準可合理期待之安全性，依消費者保護法規定對於消費者應負有無過失損害賠償責任，是故企業經營者為逃避原所負之商品責任，則可能與收購者串謀，藉資產收購的方式購買該公司全部或主要資產後，隨即解散並清算終結，使其法人格消滅，在無剩餘之資產可供清償下，消費者將陷於求償無門之情況，應如何解決？
職此，本論文認為，基於有效防堵弊端以保障消費者，在「無繼受人責任」原則之前提下，可適度引入美國司法實務見解「資產收購繼受人責任理論」，於符合一定之要件下，課與收購公司負有與合併般相同之權利義務概括繼受責任，收購公司應繼受因收購之資產所附帶對第三人可能產生之責任或債務。然而為保障消費者權益之目的而任意擴大資產收購之繼受人責任，可能對於經濟發展產生負面影響，是故，如何在消費者保護與促進公司資產自由流通利益之間，找尋其平衡之處，並就個別之案例情況予以類型化分析，建立完善收購法制度，即為本論文討論之重點。

關鍵字

商品責任 ； 嚴格責任 ； 事實上合併 ； 繼受人責任 ； 資產收購 ； 法律經濟分析

並列摘要

The characteristic of assets acquisition is “successor non-liability”. Because the traditional corporate law interprets that the acquiring company (i.e. successor) only acquires the assets from the acquired company (i.e. predecessor), the acquiring company does not need to assume the acquired company’s debts and liabilities. With the concept of “successor non-liability”, the acquiring company can avoid assuming countless potential liabilities from the acquired company. However, there are always two sides to everything. The traditional rule would be an obstacle for the victims of product liability to request reimbursement. If a corporation that manufactured defective products no longer exists after liquidating its assets to another corporation, the consumers won’t be able to ask for a refund unless the successor company is willing to compensate them for the predecessor company. Nevertheless, the fact is that the consumers usually can not get any refund or compensation from both predecessor or successor company.The issue is whether a successor company should be liable for the defective products which were sold by the predecessor company. The above-mentioned shall be the primary emphasis in this thesis.
Therefore, in order to protect creditors and consumers, this study suggests adopting the theory “successor liability” rather than the traditional “successor non-liability” principle. The successor company shall be liable for its predecessor's defective products when asset acquisition comes within one of four generally accept-ed exceptions. In addition, the theory have broadly interpreted the applicability of the exceptions or have created new based on specific context of asset acquisitions. How-ever, extending successor liability to a successor that does not manufacture or sell defective products may be inconsistent with the basic rationale of product liability and would cause negative effects on the overall economy. Consequently, this study focus-es on how to find the balance between the consumer protection and free circulation of corporate assets and analyze each case individually to provide a directive opinion of the practice of law.

並列關鍵字

Economic Analysis ； Product Liability ； Strict Liability ； De Facto Merger ； Successor liability ； Assets acquisition

參考文獻

5.王廷瑞，德國瑕疵產品責任法，消費者保護研究第1輯，1995年6月。

14.陳介山，論資產收購，中正大學法學集刊，第8期， 2002年3月。

6.吳淑莉，從台鹼案論企業併購者關於土攘及地下水汙染整治責任之繼受，臺北大學法學論叢，第74期，2010年6月。

11.武憶舟，公司分割與營業讓與二制之分析比較，法令月刊，第54卷第1期，2003年1月。

18.黃三榮，淺談M＆A之Due Diligence-以法務為中心，萬國法律雜誌，第180期，2011年12月。