第四章 少數股東召集股東會之外國立法例規範模式
第二節 美國立法例
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
87
第二節 美國立法例
觀諸美國有關是否於公司法中賦予少數股東召集股東會之權利 的規範因州而異，某些州公司法僅規定少數股東有股東會召集請求 權，於公司不為召集時，得向法院聲請命令召集股東會；有些州公 司法則未賦予少數股東召集股東會之請求權，而直接賦予少數股東 在公司未依法召集股東常會之情況下，得向法院聲請命令召集股東 會之權利，免除先向董事會請求之程序，避免拖延股東會召集之時 日；有些州公司法尚賦予具備一定條件之少數股東有不須經過法院 許可之直接自行召集權204。本文聚焦在德拉瓦州公司法（Delaware Corporation Law ）、 美 國 模 範 商 業 公 司 法 （ Modern Business Corporation Act, MBCA）有關少數股東之股東會召集請求權與法院 命令召集請求權。
第一項 模範商業公司法
美國模範商業公司法第 7.02 條第（a）項第（2）款規定205，持
204 例如伊利諾州公司法、德州公司法。然德拉瓦州公司法與模範商業公司法並未規定少數股東 得不須經法院許可而直接自行召集股東會之規定。
205 MBCA §7.02 (a)(2) (2010): (a) A corporation shall hold a special meeting of shareholders: (2) if the holders of at least 10 percent of all the votes entitled to be cast on any issue proposed to be considered at the proposed special meeting sign, date, and deliver to the corporation one or more written demands for the meeting describing the purpose or purposes for which it is to be held, provided that the articles of incorporation may fix a lower percentage or a higher percentage not exceeding 25 percent of all the votes entitled to be cast on any issue proposed to be considered. Unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation, a written demand for a special meeting may be revoked by a writing to that effect received by the corporation prior to the receipt by the corporation of demands sufficient in number to require the holding of a special meeting.
‧
召集目的，向公司請求召集股東臨時會（special meeting）。公司章程 得就持股比例設有較高或較低之門檻，但最高不得超過 25%。據此，208 MBCA §7.03 (a) (2010): (a) The [name or describe] court of the county where a corporation’s principal office (or, if none in this state, its registered office) is located may summarily order a meeting to be held:(1) on application of any shareholder of the corporation entitled to participate in an annual meeting if an annual meeting was not held or action by written consent in lieu thereof did not become effective within the earlier of 6 months after the end of the corporation’s fiscal year or 15 months after its last annual meeting; or (2) on application of a shareholder who signed a demand for a special meeting valid under section 7.02 if: (i) notice of the special meeting was not given within 30 days after the date the demand was delivered to the corporation’s secretary; or (ii) the special meeting was not held in accordance with the notice.
‧
& BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS, 7-16(2006).
210 Delaware Corporation Law §211 (c)(2009): A failure to hold the annual meeting at the designated time or to elect a sufficient number of directors to conduct the business of the corporation shall not affect otherwise valid corporate acts or work a forfeiture or dissolution of the corporation except as may be otherwise specifically provided in this chapter. If the annual meeting for election of directors is not held on the date designated therefor or action by written consent to elect directors in lieu of an annual meeting has not been taken, the directors shall cause the meeting to be held as soon as is convenient. If there be a failure to hold the annual meeting or to take action by written consent to elect directors in lieu of an annual meeting for a period of 30 days after the date designated for the annual meeting, or if no date has been designated, for a period of 13 months after the latest to occur of the organization of the corporation, its last annual meeting or the last action by written consent to elect directors in lieu of an annual meeting, the Court of Chancery may summarily order a meeting to be held upon the application of any stockholder or director. The shares of stock represented at such meeting, either in person or by proxy, and entitled to vote thereat, shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of such meeting, notwithstanding any provision of the certificate of incorporation or bylaws to the contrary. The Court of Chancery may issue such orders as may be appropriate, including, without limitation, orders designating the time and place of such meeting, the record date or dates for determination of stockholders entitled to notice of the meeting and to vote thereat, and the form of notice of such meeting.
211 Coaxial Communications Inc. v. CAN Financial Corporation. 367 A.2d 994 (Del. 1976)
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
90
211 條第（c）項規定之表面證據情況（prima facie），原則上即許可 股東之請求，並且大多會訂定會議日期，以確保股東會將確實召開
212。
第一款 Saxon Industries, Inc. v. NKFW Partners
213本案中，Saxon 為一公開發行公司，於 1982 年 4 月破產並進入 重整程序。Saxon 公司最後一次召開股東會之時間為 1981 年 6 月 21 日，即使在破產重整後未召開過股東會，Saxon 公司的董事會仍然選 出了 5 名新董事214。Saxon 公司的股東 NKFW 於 1984 年 2 月 7 日以 Saxon 為被告主張 Saxon 已超過 13 個月未召開股東會，向衡平法院 請求以命令召開股東會選任董事，而 Saxon 則抗辯，依照聯邦破產法
（11 U.S.C §1128）規定，所有重整中的公司事務得以聽證（hearing）
方式為之或由破產法院決定之，反對 NKFW 召開股東會的請求。
首先，法院認為，若是沒有其他強行法規定或是基於公平的考量，
光是以公司在破產重整程序此一理由，並不足以剝奪（divest）德拉瓦 州公司股東行使公司民主的權利，並指出公司法第 211 條第（c）項 規定所賦予股東召集股東會選任董事，乃是「實質、絕對」（virtually absolute）的權利，因此並不贊同 Saxon 的主張。其次，法院認為在公
212 JAY W.EISENHOFER,MICHAEL J.BARRY,SHAREHOLDER ACTIVISM HANDBOOK 8-30(2013)
213 Saxon Industries, Inc. v. NKFW Partners. 488 A.2d 1298 (Del. 1985)
214 在德拉瓦州公司法下，數名董事缺位可透過剩餘董事多數決補選之。Delaware Corporation Law
§223 (a)(1): Unless otherwise provided in the certificate of incorporation or bylaws: (1) Vacancies and newly created directorships resulting from any increase in the authorized number of directors elected by all of the stockholders having the right to vote as a single class may be filled by a majority of the directors then in office, although less than a quorum, or by a sole remaining director;
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
91
司法第 211 條第（c）項的規範下，迅速（prompt）的救濟對於股東常 會此一重要公司事務是必要的215。最後，第 211 條第（c）項之表面證 據情況，包含 1.該聲請人為公司之股東；且 2.公司未於指定的股東常 會日期 30 日內召開股東會；或 3.距離上次股東會已 13 個月。法院指 出，只要符合上述表面證據情況之要件，均會准許股東之請求，而在 本案 NKFW 符合上述要件之情形下，法院准許 NKFW 之請求。
第二款 Tweedy, Browne & Knapp v. Cambridge Fund, Inc.
216本案中，原告 Tweedy, Browne & Knapp（簡稱 TBK） 於 1974 年 2 月 7 日依照德拉瓦州公司法第 211 條第（c）項請求法院命令被 告 Cambridge 公司召開股東常會以選任董事，因為 Cambridge 公司 已經 15 個月未召開股東會。Cambridge 公司則抗辯在 1974 年 2 月 14 日時，公司將修改版本的委託書徵求資料寄給美國證券管理委員 會（Security And Exchange Commission, SEC）以召開股東會選任董 事，在得到證管會的同意前，公司的管理階層無法向股東徵求到委 託書，若法院同意股東之請求於此時召開股東會，對 Cambridge 公 司而言並不公平，因為股東只能將委託書委託給 TBK 而無委託給 Cambridge 公司的機會。
本案法院認為，只要公司在上次股東會後 13 個月內未召開股東 會，且聲請人是公司股東時，即符合公司法第 211 條第（c）項之表
215 Savin Business Machines Corp. v. Rapifax Corp. 375 A.2d 469(Del. Ch. 1977); Tweedy, Browne &
Knapp v. Cambridge Fund, Inc. 318 A.2d 635(Del. 1974)
216 Tweedy, Browne & Knapp v. Cambridge Fund, Inc. 318 A.2d 635(Del. 1974)
‧
promptly as possible）召開，而通常確保召開的方法為命令股東會須 於特定日期召開。第三款 Hoschett v. TSI International Software Ltd
218本案中，原告 Fred Hoschett 身為 TSI 公司之股東，有鑑於 TSI
217 Prickett v. American Steel And Pump Corp. 251 A.2d 576(Del. Ch. 1969)
218 Hoschett v. TSI International Software Ltd 683 A.2d 43(Del. Ch. 1996)
219 Delaware Corporation Law §228 (a)(2009): Unless otherwise provided in the certificate of incorporation, any action required by this chapter to be taken at any annual or special meeting of stockholders of a corporation, or any action which may be taken at any annual or special meeting of such stockholders, may be taken without a meeting, without prior notice and without a vote, if a consent or consents in writing, setting forth the action so taken, shall be signed by the holders of outstanding stock having not less than the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to authorize or take such action at a meeting at which all shares entitled to vote thereon were present.
220 Delaware Corporation Law §211 (b)(2009): Unless directors are elected by written consent in lieu of an annual meeting as permitted by this subsection, an annual meeting of stockholders shall be held for the election of directors on a date and at a time designated by or in the manner provided in the bylaws.
Stockholders may, unless the certificate of incorporation otherwise provides, act by written consent to elect directors; provided, however, that, if such consent is less than unanimous, such action by written consent may be in lieu of holding an annual meeting only if all of the directorships to which directors could be elected at an annual meeting held at the effective time of such action are vacant and are filled by such action. Any other proper business may be transacted at the annual meeting.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
93
要求是強行規定，且透過股東會選舉董事之目的係提供股東監督公 司經營者之管道，並實現公司民主，因此不得以股東書面同意之方 式取代，法院要求公司必須一年一次召開股東會選舉董事。
第四款 MFC Bancorp Ltd v. Equidyne Corp.
221本案中，Equidyne 公司 2002 年度的股東常會召開日期為 2002 年 5 月 28 日。原告 MFC 公司身為 Equidyne 公司之股東，在 2003 年 5 月 24 日時，以書面之方式向 Equidyne 公司請求公告該年度之 股東常會召開日期，但未得到 Equidyne 公司之回應。2003 年 6 月 24 日，MFC 向法院請求以命令召集 Equidyne 公司股東會（4 天後 距離去年股東會召開之日即屆滿 13 個月），Equidyne 公司隨即公告 2003 年度之股東常會召開日期為同年 9 月 23 日，且抗辯公司發布 日距離上次股東常會召開日期未逾 13 個月。
法院認為，雖然 Equidyne 公司發布今年召開股東常會日期與 2002 年股東常會召開日期間未超過 13 個月，但在德拉瓦州公司法 第 211 條第（c）項之規範下，必須是股東常會召開日距離上次股東 常會召開使未超過 13 個月始合法，僅在 13 個月內確定並發布會議 召開日期並不符合規定，從而拒絕 Equidyne 公司之抗辯。
221 MFC Bancorp Ltd v. Equidyne Corp. 844 A.2d 1015(Del. Ch. 2003)