>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Zhang Yanjuan v. Jiangsu Wanhua Industrial and Trade Development LLC, Wan Hua, Wu Liangliang and Mao Jianwei (A case about disputes over shareholder rights)
张艳娟诉江苏万华工贸发展有限公司、万华、吴亮亮、毛建伟股东权纠纷案
【法宝引证码】

Zhang Yanjuan v. Jiangsu Wanhua Industrial and Trade Development LLC, Wan Hua, Wu Liangliang and Mao Jianwei (A case about disputes over shareholder rights)
(A case about disputes over shareholder rights)
张艳娟诉江苏万华工贸发展有限公司、万华、吴亮亮、毛建伟股东权纠纷案

Zhang Yanjuan v. Jiangsu Wanhua Industrial and Trade Development LLC, Wan Hua, Wu Liangliang and Mao Jianwei
(A case about disputes over shareholder rights)@#
BASIC FACTS@#
Plaintiff: Zhang Yanjuan, female, 42, technician of the Jiangsu Coal Geophysical Survey Team, and residing at Chengxian Street, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province.@#
Defendant: Jiangsu Wanhua Industrial and Trade Development Limited Liability Company, and residing at 116 Hongwu Beilu, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province.@#
Legal representative: Wu Liangliang@#
Defendant: Wan Hua, male, 41, director of the Jiangsu Wanhua Industrial and Trade Development Limited Liability Company, residing at Guojiashan, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, and husband of the plaintiff, Zhang Yanjuan.@#
Defendant: Wu Liangliang, female, 27, and residing at Hongwu Beilu, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province.@#
Defendant: Mao Jianwei, male, 51, salesperson of the Xuefang Trade Center of Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, and residing at Baiguoshu, Baixia District, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province.@#
For share disputes with the defendants, Jiangsu Wanhua Industrial and Trade Development Limited Liability Company (“Wanhua LLC”), Wan Hua, Wu Liangliang and Mao Jianwei, the plaintiff, Zhang Yanjuan, instituted an action in the Xuanwu District People's Court of Nanjing of Jiangsu Province.@#
The plaintiff, Zhang Yanjuan claimed that: the defendant, Wanhua LLC, was formed in 1995, with a registered capital of 1.06 million yuan, and the promoters of this company were the defendant, Wan Hua (husband of the plaintiff), the plaintiff, Zhang Yanjuan and other two shareholders, Zhu Yuqian and Shen Long. Wan Hua contributed 1 million yuan, and the other shareholders including Zhang Yanjuan each contributed 20,000 yuan. In June 2006, when inquiring about the industrial and commercial registration for some reasons, the plaintiff surprisingly found that the shareholders and legal representative of the Wanhua LLC had been changed in April 2004, the plaintiff, Zhu Yuqian and Shen Long had been no longer the shareholders of this company, the shares of the plaintiff had been transferred to the defendant, Mao Jianwei, Wan Hua had also transferred his shares in the company in proportion to the 800,000 yuan of his 1 million yuan contribution to the defendant, Wu Liangliang, and the legal representative of this company had been changed from Wan Hua to Wu Liangliang. The basis for the Wanhua LLC to make the above changes was a resolution of a shareholders meeting convened on April 6, 2004, but the plaintiff, as a shareholder of this company, had never been notified to attend this meeting, never transferred her shares to anyone, and never seen the alleged shareholders meeting resolution. The signatures of the plaintiff on the shareholders meeting resolution and the agreement on transfer of capital contribution were not written by the plaintiff herself. So, the plaintiff was of the opinion that this shareholders meeting had never been actually convened, the alleged shareholders meeting resolution and agreement on transfer of capital contribution were both false and void, and the legal rights and interests of the plaintiff as a shareholder had been violated. The plaintiff had never transferred her shares to anyone, nor agreed that Wan Hua may transfer shares to anyone who was not a shareholder of this company. Wan Hua was the husband of the plaintiff but cohabitated with Wu Liangliang, and the share transfer between the two persons was actually the transfer of common property, which was unreal. The share transfer between Wan Hua and Wu Liangliang also violated the provision of the Articles of Association of the Wanhua LLC that “a shareholder shall not transfer its shares to anyone who is not a shareholder of this company,” was not notified to other shareholders according to the Articles of Association of the Wanhua LLC, and failed to get the consent of other shareholders. So, the plaintiff requested the court to confirm that the alleged resolution of the shareholders meeting of the Wanhua LLC on April 6, 2004 was void, confirm that the agreement on share transfer between the plaintiff and Mao Jianwei was void, confirm that the agreement on share transfer between Wan Hua and Wu Liangliang was void, or revoke the above shareholders meeting resolution and agreements on share transfer.@#
......

 

张艳娟诉江苏万华工贸发展有限公司、万华、吴亮亮、毛建伟股东权纠纷案@#
@#
原告:张艳娟,女,42岁,江苏煤炭物测队技术人员,住江苏省南京市成贤街。@#
被告:江苏万华工贸发展有限公司,住所地:江苏省南京市洪武北路116号。@#
法定代表人:吴亮亮。@#
被告:万华,男,41岁,江苏万华工贸发展有限公司董事,住江苏省南京市郭家山,系原告张艳娟之夫。@#
被告:吴亮亮,女,27岁,住江苏省南京市洪武北路。@#
被告:毛建伟,男,51岁,江苏省南京雪芳商贸中心业务员,住江苏省南京市白下区柏果树。@#
原告张艳娟因与被告江苏万华工贸发展有限公司(以下简称万华工贸公司)、万华、吴亮亮、毛建伟发生股东权纠纷,向江苏省南京市玄武区人民法院提起诉讼。@#
原告张艳娟诉称:被告万华工贸公司成立于1995年,注册资本为106万元,发起人为被告万华(原告的丈夫)、原告张艳娟及另外两名股东朱玉前、沈龙。其中万华出资100万元,张艳娟等三名股东各出资 2万元。2006年6月,原告因故查询工商登记时发现万华工贸公司的股东、法定代表人均已于2004年4月发生了变更,原告及朱玉前、沈龙都已不再是该公司股东,原告的股权已经转让给了被告毛建伟,万华也将其100万出资中的80万所对应的公司股权转让给了被告吴亮亮,公司法定代表人由万华变更为吴亮亮。万华工贸公司做出上述变更的依据是2004年4月6日召开的万华工贸公司股东会会议决议,但原告作为该公司股东,从未被通知参加该次股东会议,从未转让自己的股权,也未见到过该次会议的决议。该次股东会议决议以及出资转让协议中原告的签名并非原告本人书写。因此,原告认为该次股东会议实际并未召开,会议决议及出资转让协议均属虚假无效,侵犯了原告的合法股东权益。原告既没有转让过自己的股权,也不同意万华向公司股东以外的人转让股权。万华系原告的丈夫,却与吴亮亮同居,二人间的股权转让实为转移夫妻共同财产,并无真实的交易。万华与吴亮亮之间的股权转让行为也违反了万华工贸公司章程中关于“股东不得向股东之外的人转让股权”的规定,并且未依照万华工贸公司章程告知其他股东,未征得其他股东的同意。故原告请求法院确认所谓的2004年4月6日万华工贸公司股东会决议无效,确认原告与毛建伟之间的股权转让协议无效,确认万华与吴亮亮之间的股权转让协议无效,或者撤销上述股东会议决议和股权转让协议。@#
被告万华工贸公司辩称:万华工贸公司于2004年4月6日通过的股东会决议内容并无违反法律之处,万华工贸公司原股东朱玉前、沈龙均知道该次股东会决议内容及股权转让的事实,因而该决议是合法有效的。原告张艳娟认为其本人未收到会议通知,没有参加该次股东会议,即便其主张成立,也只能说明2004年4月6日的万华工贸公司股东会会议程序不符合法律和该公司章程的规定。修订后的《中华人民共和国公司法》(以下简称公司法)第二十二条规定,股东会或者股东大会、董事会的会议召集程序、表决方式违反法律、行政法规或者公司章程,或者决议内容违反公司章程的,股东可以自决议作出之日起六十日内,请求人民法院撤销。原告起诉时已超过申请撤销决议的60天法定期限,故 2004年4月6日的万华工贸公司股东会决议已然生效。原告无权否定该次股东会决议的效力。此外,原告不是本案的适格原告,因为2004年4月6日原告的全部股权已转让给了被告毛建伟,原告已不再具有股东资格,故无权提起本案诉讼。请求法院驳回原告的诉讼请求。@#
被告万华辩称:万华工贸公司于2004年4月6日召开的股东会是合法的,本人享有万华工贸公司的全部表决权,经本人表决同意的股东会决议应为有效。本人将 80万元个人出资对应的公司股权转让给被告吴亮亮,征得了公司所有股东的同意,该转让行为也是有效的。原告张艳娟诉称其未参加股东会、也未在相应文件中签字属实,但因本人与原告系夫妻关系,财产是混同的,且双方曾约定公司股权归本人所有,因此本人代原告参加股东会并在股东会决议和股权转让协议中代为签字,均是合法有效的。自2004年4月6日起原告已不再是万华工贸公司股东,其无权提起本案诉讼。@#
被告吴亮亮辩称:本人作为股权的受让方不应当成为本案的被告,其受让股权的程序是合法的。原告张艳娟与被告万华系夫妻关系,本人有理由相信万华可以代表原告作出放弃对于万华股权的优先购买权的表示。即便原告没有授权万华表达放弃优先购买权的意思,本人作为善意购买人,其合法权益亦应受到保护。原告与万华之间的夫妻矛盾应依据婚姻法进行处理,与本人无关。万华工贸公司2004年4月6日股东会决议和出资转让协议均应认定为有效。本人受让股权并被选任为万华工贸公司董事长已经两年多,该公司经营正常,在此期间原告从未提出过股东会决议违法或侵权等主张。2004年4月6日本人以80万元对价购买了万华在万华工贸公司的部分股权,现原告或万华如以同样的价格受让,本人同意将股权再转让给原告或万华。@#
被告毛建伟辩称:被告万华工贸公司曾借用过本人的身份证,但本人根本不知道自己已经受让了原告张艳娟等人在万华工贸公司的股权,从未参加过2004年4月 6日的万华工贸公司股东会,也不认识该公司股东沈龙、朱玉前等人。万华工贸公司章程、2004年4月6日的股东会决议及股权转让协议中的毛建伟签名也非本人所签。@#
南京市玄武区人民法院一审查明:@#
被告万华工贸公司成立于1995年12月21日,发起人为被告万华、原告张艳娟和其他两名股东朱玉前、沈龙,注册资本为 106万元,其中万华出资100万元,朱玉前、沈龙、张艳娟各出资2万元。1995年11月23日,万华、朱玉前、沈龙、张艳娟签订了万华工贸公司章程,该章程规定:公司股东不得向股东以外的人转让其股权,只能在股东内部相互转让,但必须经全体股东同意;股东有权优先购买其他股东转让的股权;股东会由股东按照出资比例行使表决权,每10万元为一个表决权;股东会议分为定期会议和临时会议,并应于会议召开五日前通知全体股东;定期股东会议应一个月召开一次;股东出席股东会议也可书面委托他人参加,行使委托书载明的权力;股东会议应当对所议事项作出决议,决议应当由代表二分之一以上表决权的股东表决通过;股东会对公司增加或减少注册资本、股东转让股权及公司的合并、分立、变更公司形式、解散、清算等事项作出的决议,应由代表三分之二以上表决权的股东表决通过;股东会议应当对所议事项的决定作出会议记录,出席会议的股东应当在会议记录上签名,等等。@#
被告万华工贸公司成立后,由被告万华负责公司的经营管理。@#
2004年4月12日,被告万华工贸公司向公司登记机关申请变更登记,具体事项为:1.将公司名称变更为江苏办公伙伴贸易发展有限公司(以下简称伙伴贸易公司);2.法定代表人变更为被告吴亮亮,股东变更为被告万华、吴亮亮、毛建伟及股东邢小英四人;3.变更了公司章程的部分内容。@#
被告万华工贸公司申请上述变更公司登记所依据的材料为:@#
1.2004年4月6日股权转让协议两份,其主要内容分别为:被告万华将其100万元出资中的80万元出资对应的公司股权转让给被告吴亮亮;朱玉前将其出资2万元对应的公司股权转让给邢小英,沈龙将其2万元出资中的1万元对应的股权转让给被告毛建伟,将另1万元对应的公司股权转让给邢小英,原告张艳娟将2万元出资对应的公司股权转让给毛建伟。上述两份股权转让协议落款处有全部转让人及受让人的签名。@#
2.被告万华工贸公司章程(2004年4月6日修正)一份,该章程除记载并确认了关于公司股东、董事、监事和公司住所地、名称的变更外,还作了如下规定:公司股东有权出席股东会议,并按照出资比例行使表决权,有权选举公司的董事或监事,同时享有被选举权;公司股东有权依法及公司章程的规定转让其出资;公司股东向股东以外的人转让其股权,必须经过半数以上的股东同意,不同意的股东应当购买被转让的股权,如果不购买被转让的股权,则视为同意向股东以外的人转让股权;经公司股东同意转让的股权,在同等条件下,其他股东对该部分股权有优先购买权;股东依法转让股权后,公司编制新的股东名册;股东会议分为定期会议和临时会议,定期会议应每年召开一次,临时会议由代表四分之一以上表决权的股东、三分之一的董事或监事提议方可召开;公司股东出席股东会议也可书面委托他人参加股东会议,行使委托书中载明的权力;召开股东会议,应当于会议召开前十五日以书面形式通知全体股东,股东会应对所议事项的决定作成会议记录,出席会议的股东应当在会议记录上签名,等等。该章程有被告吴亮亮、毛建伟、万华及股东邢小英的签名。@#
......


Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.

1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.

2. Binding to the account with access to this database.

3. Apply for a trial account.

4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥900.00】 for your single purchase.
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
 
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese