Issues concerning Whether a Company's Shareholders Should Assume Liabilities for the Company's Creditors Due to ...
2018-08-25 1690
- Document Number:No. 33 [2003] of the Enforcement Work Office of the Supreme People's Court
- Area of Law: Contract
- Level of Authority: Documents of Judicial Interpretation Nature
- Date issued:12-11-2003
- Effective Date:12-11-2003
- Issuing Authority: Supreme People's Court
- Status: Effective
Reply of the Enforcement
Work Office of the Supreme People's Court on Issues concerning Whether a
Company's Shareholders Should Assume Liabilities for the Company's Creditors
Due to Defects in Capital Increase after the Formation of the Company
(No. 33 [2003] of the Enforcement Work Office of the Supreme People's Court on
December 11, 2003)
The Higher People's Court of Jiangsu Province:
Your Request for Instructions on the Application of Nantong Development Zone
Fuma Materials Company for Enforcement on Shenzhen Longgang Film City
Industries Co., Ltd. (No. 171 [2002], HPC, Jiangsu) has been received. Upon
deliberation, the following reply is hereby made:
This Court holds that an increase in a company's registered capital, for which
the original shareholders agree to assume liabilities in accordance with the
original proportion of capital contribution, is an act of expanding the scale
of operation and enhancing the ability to assume liabilities, and is not
different from the initial capital contribution in the formation of the
company. If the shareholders have capital increase defect, they should assume
the same liabilities as those when the company was formed. However, the capital
increase after the formation of the company and the capital contribution in the
formation of company are different in that the shareholders' delivery of
capital was at different times. Because of this difference in time, the traders
(the company's creditors) have different expectations for the company's ability
to assume liabilities. The obligation (or responsibility) for capital increase
or contribution as fulfilled by shareholders in accordance with their
commitments is a statutory obligation for capital adequacy in relation to the
society, and such a responsibility should be corresponding with a judgment that
is made by creditors based on the company's registered capital for the
company's ability to assume liabilities. In the case at bar, a transaction between
Nantong Development Zone Fuma Materials Company (hereinafter referred to as
“Fuma Company”) and Shenzhen Longgang Film City Industries Co., Ltd.
(hereinafter referred to as “Longgang Film City”) was made before Longgang Film
City changed its registered capital, and therefore Fuma Company should make a
judgment for the ability of Longgang Film City to assume liabilities based on
its registered capital of 5 million yuan at that time. In addition, there is no
direct causal relationship between whether Longgang Film City can repay debt to
Fuma Company and whether the registered capital increased subsequently by
Shenzhen Great Wall (Hui Hua) Industrial Enterprise Group (hereinafter referred
to as “Hui Hua Group”), a shareholder of Longgang Film City, was put in place.
Hui Hua Group would only assume liabilities corresponding with its capital
increase defect for the traders (the company's creditors) after the registered
capital of Longgang Film City was increased. Fuma Company cannot require Hui
Hua Group with the subsequent capital increase defect to assume liabilities for
the creditor's rights arising out of the transaction with Longgang Film City
prior to the capital increase.