合規(guī)解讀 - 一人有限責任公司能為股東擔保嗎? Interpretation of regulations - Can one person limited liability company guarantee for shareholders?
我國《公司法》第16條規(guī)定了公司為股東提供擔保的合法性。對此類擔保作出了程序上的限制性規(guī)定，以立法的形式結束了, 公司法理論界與實務界關于公司能否為自已股東提供擔保的爭論。
Article 16th of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates the legality of the guarantee provided by the company for shareholders. It makes procedural restrictions on this kind of guarantee, and ends the dispute between the theoretical and practical circles of company law about whether the company can provide guarantee for its own shareholders in the form of legislation.
而作為對公司類型的重大發(fā)展，《公司法》規(guī)定了一人有限責任公司制度，使一人公司在我國得到了法律的認可。但《公司法》未明確規(guī)定一人公司能否為其股東提供擔保，司法裁判中，各地法院對此也呈現出同案不同判的情形。
As a significant development of the company type, the Company Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates the system of one person limited liability company, which makes one person company recognized by law in China. However, the law does not specify whether a one-man company can provide guarantee for its shareholders. In the judicial judgment, the courts in different regions have different judgments in the same case.
根據我們在處理類似案件中的經驗總結，一人有限責任公司為自己股東擔保是有效的。
According to our experience in handling similar cases, it is effective for one person limited liability company to guarantee for its shareholders.
首先，從《公司法》第16條的適用范圍看，其根據擔保受益人將公司擔保分為一般擔保和特殊擔保。所謂一般擔保，即公司為無投資關系和無實際控制關系的其他法人、經濟組織和個人提供的擔保。所謂特殊擔保，即公司為有投資關系的股東或者有實際控制力的其他主體提供的擔保，擔保受益人與公司存在利益關系甚至對公司有控制力。
First of all, from the scope of application of Article 16th of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China, the company guarantee is divided into general guarantee and special guarantee according to the guarantee beneficiary. The so-called general guarantee refers to the guarantee provided by the company for other legal persons, economic organizations and individuals without investment relationship or actual control relationship. The so-called special guarantee refers to the guarantee provided by the company for the shareholders with investment relationship or other subjects with actual control power. The beneficiary of the guarantee has an interest relationship with the company and even has control power over the company.
前者依據章程的授權由公司經營決策機構董事會或者公司所有者決策機構股東會行使，后者的決策權只能由公司所有者決策機構股東會行使。對于不設事會或者股東會的一人公司而言，《公司法》第16條關于擔保能力的規(guī)定無適用的必要，因為不設董事會或者股東會的一人公司在公司所有權和經營權上未分離，均由公司所有者即唯一的股東行使，而公司為他人保的決策權屬于公司所有者的權利。因此，該規(guī)定僅主要適用于一般有限公司股份公司，對上市公司適用的意義更大。
The former is authorized by the articles of association to be exercised by the board of directors of the company's decision-making body or the shareholders' meeting of the company's owner's decision-making body, while the latter can only be exercised by the shareholders' meeting of the company's owner's decision-making body. For a one-man company without a board of directors or a board of shareholders, Article 16 of the law on the guarantee ability is not necessary, because the one-man company without a board of directors or a board of shareholders does not separate the ownership and management rights of the company, which are exercised by the owner of the company, that is, the only shareholder, and the decision-making power of the company for others belongs to the owner of the company. Therefore, the regulation is only applicable to general limited company, and it is more significant for listed companies.
其次，從《公司法》第16條的立法本意和立法目的看，第16條規(guī)定的特殊擔保下股東回避表決旨在防止大股東(利害關系股東)濫用股東權利，保護公司和小股東(無利害關系股東)免遭公司擔保的風險，確保公司更加客觀公正地決定是否為其股東進行擔保，而并非禁止或限該類特殊擔保。
Secondly, from the perspective of the legislative purpose of Article 16th of the law, the purpose of shareholders' avoidance of voting under the special guarantee stipulated in Article 16th is to prevent major shareholders (interested shareholders) from abusing their rights, protect the company and small shareholders (non interested shareholders) from the risk of the company's guarantee, and ensure that the company can make a more objective and fair decision on whether to guarantee for its shareholders rather than forbid it or limited to such special guarantee.
實踐中，一人公司不存在大股東與小股東之別，也不在利害關系股東與無利害關系股東之別，唯一的股東同意提供擔保的不僅體現了股東意志，也體現了公司意志，在沒有其他利害關系股東存在的情形下，也就談不上損害其他股東的利益。
In practice, there is no difference between large shareholders and small shareholders, nor between interested shareholders and non interested shareholders in one person limited liability company. The only shareholder who agrees to provide guarantee not only reflects the will of shareholders, but also reflects the will of the company. In the case of no other interested shareholders, it can not damage the interests of others.
因此，一人公司的股東可以自行作出由一人公司為自己債務提供擔保的決定。至于是否損害公司債權人利益，則屬于民法中撤銷權的范疇，不屬于公司法的調整范圍。如果股東公司擔保損害資本維持原則，甚至抽逃出資，則可以援引公司法關于股東抽逃出資或者股東濫用公司法人地位等法律規(guī)定，追究股東的法律責任。
Therefore, the shareholders of one person limited liability company can make their own decision to guarantee their debts. As for whether to damage the interests of the creditors of the company, it belongs to the scope of revocation right in the civil law, and does not belong to the adjustment scope of the company law. If the shareholder's company guarantee damages the principle of maintaining capital, or even withdraws capital contribution, the legal provisions of the company law on Shareholder's withdrawal of capital contribution or shareholder's abuse of corporate status can be invoked to investigate the legal liability of shareholders.
再次，從審查債權人的注意義務看，一般擔保的債權人有義務向公索取公司章程規(guī)定的擔保決策機構關于同意擔保的決議。特殊擔保的債權人有義務向公司索取公司股東會關于同意擔保的決議。
Thirdly, from the perspective of examining the duty of care of the creditors, the general secured creditors have the obligation to ask the company for the resolution of the guarantee decision-making body on agreeing to the guarantee stipulated in the articles of association. The creditor of special guarantee has the obligation to ask for the resolution of the shareholders' meeting of the company on agreeing to guarantee.
否則，一旦公司越權提供擔保，債權人因未盡到必要的注意義務而存在過失，即無法得《合同法》第49條規(guī)定的表見代理制度的保護，擔保合同歸于無效。Otherwise, once the company provides the guarantee beyond its authority, the creditor will be negligent because he fails to fulfill the necessary duty of care, that is, he will not be protected by the apparent agency system stipulated in Article 49th of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China, and the guarantee contract will be invalid.
實踐中，一人公司因僅有一個股東，自然無法成立股東會并形成股東會議，況且股東會設立與否也僅是形式上的差別，法律之所以賦予股東會職權是因為股東會由股東組成，而股東是公司的出資人。一人公司雖不設股東會，但股東本身仍是出資人，自然有權行使公司法所賦予股東會的所有職權，包括對外擔保的決策權。
In practice, a one-man company has only one shareholder, so it is impossible to set up a shareholders' meeting and form a shareholders' meeting. Moreover, whether a shareholders' meeting is set up or not is only a formal difference. The reason why the law endows the shareholders' meeting with authority is that the shareholders' meeting is composed of the investors of the company. Although a one-man company does not set up a shareholders' meeting, the shareholders themselves are still the investors and naturally have the right to run the company, including the decision-making power of external guarantee.
因此，只要公司章程不禁止，股東個人同意后公司對外擔保的能力就具備了，只不過股東行使職權作出擔保的決定時，法律上倡導的是采取書面形式并由股東簽名備置于公司，這樣是為了更全面更完整地記載一人公司的運營狀況。
Thus, as long as the articles of association do not prohibit the company to guarantee,it will have the ability to provide external guarantee with the consent of the shareholders. However, when the shareholders exercise their powers to make the decision of guarantee, it is advocated in law that the written form should be adopted and signed by the shareholders, so as to record the operation status of one-man company more comprehensively and completely.
但實踐中一人公司操作并不如此規(guī)范和明確，股東個人同意的意思表示往往是在擔保合同中加以體現，也就是說，擔保合同上加蓋了公司的公章就意味著股東做出了同意擔保的意思表示，更何況是特殊擔保即為該股東的債務進行擔保。
But in practice, the operation of one-man company is not so standardized and clear, and the expression of shareholders' personal consent is often reflected in the guarantee contract, that is to say, if the company's official seal is stamped on the guarantee contract, it means that the shareholders have made the expression of consent to guarantee, not to mention the special guarantee, that is, to guarantee the debt of the shareholder.
作為債權人而言，對于一人公司擔保能力的審查義務是非常寬松的，只要審查一人公司的章程中有無對外擔保的特殊規(guī)定，如果沒有，那么擔保合同中有一人公司蓋章即可“高枕無憂”。
As a creditor, the obligation to review the guarantee ability of one-man company is very loose. As long as there are special provisions on external guarantee in the articles of association of one-man company, if not, the one-man company’s seal in the guarantee contract makes them easy.
因此，在公司章程沒有對公司擔保的問題作出規(guī)定的情況下，基于債權人沒有過錯，對擔保的合理期待是應當受到保護的。
Therefore, in the case that the articles of association does not provide for the issue of corporate guarantee, the reasonable expectation of guarantee should be protected because the creditors have no fault.
最后，法無禁止即自由。既然《公司法》第16條作為一般規(guī)范而言對一人公司無適用的必要，而且《公司法》分則的特殊規(guī)范中亦未對一人公司為其股東提供擔保作相應規(guī)定。
Finally, the law is free without prohibition. Since Article 16th of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China is not necessary to apply to one-man company as a general norm, and there is no corresponding provision for one-man company to provide guarantee for its shareholders in the special norms of the law.
根據私法中“法無禁止即自由”的理念，以及從適應市場商主體的融資需求，尊重交易效率和減少交易成本出在章程沒有禁止性規(guī)定的前提下，應當允許一人公司為其股東提供擔保。
According to the concept of "freedom without prohibition of law" in private law, and in order to adapt to the financing needs of market players, respect transaction efficiency and reduce transaction costs In the absence of prohibitive provisions, one person company should be allowed to provide guarantee for its shareholders.
作者:徐寶同 Author：XuBaotong
日照仲裁委員會 仲裁員
Arbitrator of RIZHAO Arbitration
上海錦坤律師事務所 合伙人
Partner of Shanghai JinKun Law firm
業(yè)務方向: 民商事類、訴訟仲裁爭議解決
Commercial Arbitration and Litigation
聯系方式Phone:+86-139 1721 9966
