股权激励方案落地执行
十年股权整理解决方案落地实施

　　基本案情

　　Basic Facts of the Case

　　A公司，成立于1997年10月10日，原注册资本200万元。随着公司逐渐发展，至2007年9月，A公司注册资本为5000万元。

　　Company A was established on October 10, 1997 with an original registered capital of 2 million yuan. As the company gradually developed, by September 2007, the registered capital of Company A was 50 million yuan.

　　王某拥有A公司42%的股权，王芳系其唯一女儿。

　　Wang owns 42% of the shares in Company A, and Wang Fang is his only daughter.

　　2011年初，王某经诊断患病。2015年11月23日，王某立下遗嘱内容：“本人去世后，以上投资于A公司的股权均由本人女儿王芳继承。与以上股权相对应的股东权利均由王芳享有并承受……本人其他亲属或任何第三人均不得以任何理由对继承人继承本人以上遗产及权益进行干涉……”。同年12月4日，王某逝世。

　　In early 2011, Wang was diagnosed with illness. On November 23, 2015, Wang made a will stating: "After my death, all the equity invested in Company A will be inherited by my daughter Wang Fang. The shareholder rights corresponding to the above-mentioned equity shall be enjoyed and inherited by Wang Fang... My other relatives or any third party shall not interfere with the inheritance of my inheritance and rights for any reason. On December 4th of the same year, Wang passed away.

　　王某去世后，公司其他股东无人认购王某42%的股权，王芳提起诉讼，要求确认股东资格、办理变更登记。

　　After Wang's death, no other shareholders of the company subscribed to 42% of Wang's equity. Wang Fang filed a lawsuit requesting confirmation of shareholder qualifications and registration of changes.

　　裁判结果

　　judgment result

　　一审法院认为：首先，本案中，王某去世后，公司和其他股东理应按章程规定处理，即公司应安排其他股东受让王某的股权以维护公司的人合性，但A公司在诉讼中明确表示公司其他股东无人认购受让王某的42%的股权，而该种情形如何处理在A公司的章程中并未作出明确规定，因此该章程对继承问题的规定具有不完全性。

　　The first instance court held that, firstly, in this case, after Wang's death, the company and other shareholders should handle it according to the provisions of the articles of association, that is, the company should arrange for other shareholders to acquire Wang's equity to maintain the company's integrity. However, Company A clearly stated in the lawsuit that no other shareholders of the company subscribed to acquire Wang's 42% equity, and how to handle this situation is not clearly stipulated in Company A's articles of association. Therefore, the provisions on inheritance in the articles of association are incomplete.

　　本案中，在公司无人受让王某股权的情况下应按《公司法》第七十五条（新《公司法》第九十条）的规定“自然人股东死亡后，其合法继承人可以继承股东资格”而支持王芳根据遗嘱继承王某在A公司的股东资格。

　　In this case, in the absence of any transferee of Wang's equity in the company, Wang Fang should be supported to inherit Wang's shareholder qualification in Company A according to Article 75 of the Company Law (Article 90 of the new Company Law), which stipulates that "after the death of a natural person shareholder, his legal heir may inherit the shareholder qualification".

　　A公司不服，提出上诉。

　　Company A disagrees and files an appeal.

　　二审法院认为：判断本案中王芳是否有权继承其父王某的股东资格，关键在于解读A公司章程有无对股东资格继承问题作出例外规定。

　　The second instance court believes that the key to determining whether Wang Fang has the right to inherit his father Wang's shareholder qualifications in this case lies in interpreting whether there are any exceptions to the inheritance of shareholder qualifications in Company A's articles of association.

　　正确理解章程条款，应在文义解释的基础上，综合考虑章程体系、制定背景以及实施情况等因素加以分析。

　　To correctly understand the provisions of the articles of association, it is necessary to analyze them comprehensively based on the interpretation of the text, taking into account factors such as the system of the articles of association, the background of its formulation, and the implementation situation.

　　如前所述，A公司自2007年以来先后经历五次章程修订。自2009年起章程中删除了继承人可以继承股东资格的条款，且明确规定股东不得向股东以外的人转让股权，可以反映出A公司具有高度的人合性和封闭性特征。

　　As mentioned earlier, Company A has undergone five revisions to its articles of association since 2007. Since 2009, the articles of association have removed the clause that allows heirs to inherit shareholder qualifications, and clearly stipulate that shareholders are not allowed to transfer their equity to anyone other than shareholders, which reflects the high degree of personal and closed nature of Company A.

　　因此，纵观A公司章程的演变，并结合A公司对离职退股的实践处理方式，本案应当认定公司章程已经排除了股东资格的继承。

　　Therefore, looking at the evolution of Company A's articles of association and combined with Company A's practical handling of resignation and share withdrawal, this case should be deemed that the company's articles of association have excluded the inheritance of shareholder qualifications.

　　综上二审法院判决：撤销一审判决；驳回王芳的诉讼请求。

　　Based on the judgment of the second instance court, the first instance judgment is revoked; Reject Wang Fang's lawsuit request.

　　案件解读

　　Case interpretation

　　本案一审和二审产生了不同的判决结果，关键在于法院对章程约定的内容理解不同。一审法院认为该公司章程在排除股东继承这一问题上没有涵盖本案股权继承的问题，不能得出章程排除了本案情况下股东资格继承的结论。二审法院则认为章程已经明确排除了股东资格继承，鉴于以上原因，不同法院作出不同判决。

　　The difference in judgment results between the first and second trials of this case lies in the court's different understanding of the content stipulated in the articles of association. The first instance court held that the company's articles of association did not cover the issue of shareholder inheritance in this case, and could not conclude that the articles of association excluded shareholder qualification inheritance in this case. The second instance court believes that the articles of association have clearly excluded the inheritance of shareholder qualifications. In view of the above reasons, different courts have made different judgments.

　　因此，在公司治理中，公司章程的制定一定要力求语言准确、完整，避免歧义，以保障治理的稳定。

　　Therefore, in corporate governance, the formulation of the company's articles of association must strive for accurate and complete language, avoid ambiguity, and ensure the stability of governance.

　　本文由 山东股权激励方案  友情奉献.更多有关的知识请点击  http://www.lushangyun.com/   真诚的态度.为您提供为全面的服务.更多有关的知识我们将会陆续向大家奉献.敬请期待.

　　This article is a friendly contribution from Shandong Equity Incentive Plan For more related knowledge, please click http://www.lushangyun.com/ Sincere attitude To provide you with comprehensive services We will gradually contribute more relevant knowledge to everyone Stay tuned