股東有限責任與否認公司法人格理論之調和－－臺灣引進“揭穿公司面紗原則”之探討

The Harmonization of the Shareholders’ Limited Liability Doctrine and the Theory of Disregarding the Corporate Entity-- Is It Possible to Introduce the Doctrine of Piercing the Corporate Veil into Taiwan

股東有限責任制度是現代公司法制最重要的發明。在股東有限責任之下，股東對公司的責任僅限於其所投資之部分，股東個人無須對公司債權人負責。而公司具有獨立的法人格，使得公司與其股東之人格相分離，且兩者的財產亦分離獨立，公司可獨自為權利義務之主體。唯為避免股東有限責任與公司法人格遭到濫用，英美兩國公司法制遂發展出所謂的“揭穿公司面紗原則”。在承認公司獨立法人格的基礎上，突破公司法人格獨立與股東有限責任之界線，針對特定個案，否認公司之法人格，進而責令公司股東對公司債權人負責。本文將透過比較法的方式，探討英美兩國揭穿公司面紗原則之運用，以及臺灣引進此一制度之可行性，以作為臺灣未來改進之參考。

The limited liability for shareholders of a company is the greatest discovery of modern corporate law. For shareholders, this means that their liability for the company’s debts is limited to the amount they have vested. Further, a company is a legal entity distinct from its shareholders. It is capable of enjoying rights and of being subject to duties which are not the same as those enjoyed or borne by its shareholders. In order to prevent the abuse of limited liability and the separate legal personality of the company, the U. K. and the U. S. have developed the so-called “Piercing the Corporate Veil”. Under the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil, the court may set aside the company’s formality and hold an individual or shareholder responsible for the acts or debts of the company. This article will explore the practices of piercing the corporate veil in the U. K. and the U. S. and will analyze the feasibility of introducing this doctrine into Taiwan through a comparative study.