English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 94657/125189 (76%)
Visitors : 30606798      Online Users : 280
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131675


    Title: 董事提名制度之探討-以提名委員會為中心
    Board Member Nomination and the Nominating Committee
    Authors: 簡大鈞
    Chien, Ta-Chun
    Contributors: 朱德芳
    Chu, Te-Fang
    簡大鈞
    Chien, Ta-Chun
    Keywords: 公司治理
    董事候選人提名
    提名委員會
    Corporate governance
    Shareholder director nominations
    Nominating committee
    Date: 2020
    Issue Date: 2020-09-02 12:24:07 (UTC+8)
    Abstract:   公司為擴展營運版圖,藉由上市櫃方式於資本市場向投資大眾籌募資金。因此,當公司規模日益茁壯,經營權與所有權分離終將成為必然的產物。此時,股東若持有相當比例之股份,即擁有對於公司相當程度之控制權,進而成為控制股東。其中,依我國現行規範,董事候選人之提名主體僅有董事會與少數股東,惟董事會成員卻多由經營階層或控制股東支持之對象所擔任。縱使法律明文賦予少數股東提名權,似難以對於提名程序產生足夠之影響力,亦無法撼動經營權之更迭。然而,由於國際間陸續爆發重大企業弊案之情事,逐漸掀起檢討董事提名制度之聲浪,進而造就提名委員會制度之興起。
      關於我國提名委員會制度之規範,有別於審計、薪酬委員會明訂於證券交易法中,目前僅有臺灣證券交易所頒布之「○○股份有限公司提名委員會組織規程參考範例」可供公司作為參考架構。儘管已設置提名委員會之上市櫃公司仍佔少數,惟其中多數係從近年開始成立,顯見公司對於提名委員會之重視已逐漸提升。因此,本文將從我國提名委員會制度之現況著手,分析公司實務可能面臨之問題,並透過參考美國、英國與新加坡之公司治理守則或提名委員會之規定,試圖提供國內對於提名委員會之改革方向。
      In order to expand their scope of business, the companies list on the exchange or over the counter to raise funds from the public in the capital market. Therefore, it must lead to the separation of ownership and control when the company grows bigger. Meanwhile, if shareholders hold a considerable proportion of shares, they will gain corresponding degree of control over the company and become controlling shareholders. Among them, according to current regulations, the rights of nominating director candidates are only belong to the board of directors and minority shareholders, but most of the board members are selected and supported by the management or controlling shareholders. Even if the law expressly grants minority shareholders the right to nominate directors, it seems difficult to influence the nomination process and cannot change the right of management. However, due to the continuous outbreak of international frauds among major corporates, there has been a wave of reviews about the director nomination system, which has further led to the rise of the nominating committee.
      Regarding the domestic nominating committee system, different from the audit and remuneration committees stipulated in the Securities and Exchange Act, at present only the "Sample Template of XXX Co., Ltd. Charter of Nominating Committee” issued by the Taiwan Stock Exchange can be referenced for company architecture. Although the listed companies that have established a nomination committee are still in the minority, most of them were established in recent years which implies the increase of the company emphasis on the nomination committee gradually. Therefore, this article will start with the current status of domestic nominating committee system, analyze the problems that companies may face in practice, and try to provide directions of domestic reform for the nominating committee by referring to the corporate governance codes or the nominating committee regulations of the United States, the United Kingdom and Singapore.
    Reference: 中文文獻
    (一)專書論著
    1. 王文宇,公司法論,6版,元照出版公司,2018年10月。
    2. 柯芳枝,公司法論(上),8版,三民書局,2012年2月。
    3. 馮震宇,公司證券重要爭議問題研究,元照出版公司,2005年5月。
    4. 劉連煜,現代公司法,13版,新學林,2018年9月。
    5. 劉連煜,公司法理論與判決研究(一),2版,劉連煜,1997年11月。
    6. 劉連煜、杜怡靜、林郁馨、陳肇鴻,選任獨立董事與公司治理,元照出版公司,2013年7月。
    7. 賴英照,股市遊戲規則:最新證券交易法解析,3版,賴英照,2017年9月。
    8. 賴英照講座教授七秩華誕祝賀論文集編輯委員會,當前公司與證券法制新趨勢-賴英照講座教授七秩華誕祝賀論文集,元照出版公司,2016年8月。
    (二)期刊論文
    1. 方嘉麟、曾宛如,強化公司治理,月旦法學雜誌,275期,頁22-35,2018年4月。
    2. 王文宇,從公司治理論董監事法制之改革,台灣本土法學雜誌,34期,頁99-116,2002年5月。
    3. 朱德芳,獨立董事不可或缺的工作夥伴—公司治理主管,月旦會計實務研究,20期,頁34-43,2019年8月。
    4. 林國彬,股東提案權之行使與權利保障之研究—台灣與美國法制之比較,臺北大學法學論叢,86期,頁185-238,2013年6月。
    5. 邵慶平,美國公司董事選舉制度近年的改革與發展—一個比較法上的思考,國立中正大學法學集刊,26期,頁1-62,2009年5月。
    6. 陳盈如,我國企業公司治理之挑戰與展望—以董事提名制度為例,財金法學研究,2卷4期,頁551-592,2019年12月。
    7. 陳塘偉、駱淑娟,獨立董事之獨立性,月旦會計實務研究,20期,頁17-22,2019年8月。
    8. 曾宛如,半套公司治理移植經驗—以審計委員會與特別委員會為例,月旦民商法雜誌,43期,頁33-47,2014年3月。
    9. 曾宛如,論董事候選人提名制,月旦法學教室,180期,頁39-50,2017年10月。
    10. 楊岳平,論金融控股公司治理的改革方向:以獨立董事與提名委員會為中心,臺大法學論叢,48卷2期,頁683-750,2019年6月。
    11. 蔡昌憲,評我國強制設置薪酬委員會之立法政策—從經濟分析及美國金融改革法談起,中研院法學期刊,11期,頁249-340,2012年9月。
    12. 劉子平,美國股東委託書使用規則述評,金融法苑,90期,頁229¬-250,2015年5月。
    (三)研究計畫
    1. 曾宛如、黃銘傑,董事會提名委員會制度之建置暨股東提案權機制之現狀與改善之研析,臺灣集中保管結算所:國立臺灣大學法律學院,2015年。

    外語文獻
    (一)專書論著
    1. American Bar Association (1976), CORPORATE DIRECTOR’S GUIDEBOOK, American: ABA Book Publishing.
    2. Singapore Institute of Directors (2018), NOMINATING COMMITTEE GUIDE, Singapore: Write Editions.
    (二)期刊論文
    1. American Bar Association, Report of the Task Force of the ABA Section of Business Law Corporate Governance Committee on Delineation of Governance Roles and Responsibilities, 65 BUS. LAW. 107(2009).
    2. Lucian Arye Bebchuk, The Case for Shareholder Access to the Ballot, 59 BUS. LAW. 43(2003).
    3. Richard Clune, Dana R. Hermanson, James G. Tompkins, Zhongxia (Shelly) Ye, The Nominating Committee Process: A Qualitative Examination of Board Independence and Formalization, CAR VOL.31 NO.3 748 (2014).
    4. Roberta S. Karmel, Realizing the Dream of William O. Douglas-The Securities and Exchange Commission Takes Charge of Corporate Governance, 30 DEL. J. CORP. L. 79 (2005).
    5. Michael K. Moliter, The Crucial Role of the Nominating Committee:Re-Inventing Nominating Committees in the Aftermath of Shareholder Access to Proxy, 11. U.C. DAVIS BUS. L.J. 97 (2010).
    6. Michael E. Murphy, The Nominating Process for Corporate Boards of Directors: A Decision-Making Analysis, 5 BERKELEY BUS. L.J. 131 (2008).
    7. Sophie Nachemson-Ekwall & Colin Mayer, Nomination Committees and Corporate Governance: Lessons from Sweden and the UK, Saïd Business School WP 2018-12 1 (2018).
    8. Usha Rodrigues, Let the Money Do the Governing: The Case for Reuniting Ownership and Control, 9 STAN J.L. BUS. & FIN. 254 (2004).
    (三)官方資料
    1. Business Roundtable, Principles of Corporate Governance (2006).
    2. Financial Reporting Council, UK Corporate Governance Code (2018).
    3. Institutional Shareholder Services, Governance Quality Score (2020).
    4. Monetary Authority of Singapore, Code of Corporate Governance (2012).
    5. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Corporate Governance Factbook (2019).
    6. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Board Member Nomination and Election (2012).
    7. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance (2015).
    8. The Conference Board, Corporate Board Practices in the Russel 3000 and S&P500 (2019).
    9. The Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators, Terms of Reference for the Nomination Committee (2018).
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    法律科際整合研究所
    105652013
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105652013
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202001495
    Appears in Collections:[法律科際整合研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    201301.pdf4550KbAdobe PDF0View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback