首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     

陆家豪非"独立董事"及其责任承担的质疑--全国首例"花瓶董事"状告证监会案引发的法律思考
引用本文:钟华友. 陆家豪非"独立董事"及其责任承担的质疑--全国首例"花瓶董事"状告证监会案引发的法律思考[J]. 河北法学, 2003, 21(6): 127-130
作者姓名:钟华友
作者单位:北京工商大学,法学院,北京,100037
摘    要:全国首例“花瓶董事”陆家豪状告证监会案已经落下帷幕。围绕陆家豪是“独立董事”还是“董事”及其责任承担,笔者看法是:法院判决陆为“独立董事”是不合法的;认定陆的责任承担上是过重的。

关 键 词:独立董事  责任  质疑
文章编号:1002-3933(2003)06-0127-04
修稿时间:2003-05-19

Lu Jiahao was not an "Independent Director"and the Responsibility He Beared was Challenged--Reflections on law caused by our nation''''s first particular case-"Vase Director"accused SRC
Zhong Hua-you. Lu Jiahao was not an "Independent Director"and the Responsibility He Beared was Challenged--Reflections on law caused by our nation''''s first particular case-"Vase Director"accused SRC[J]. Hebei Law Science, 2003, 21(6): 127-130
Authors:Zhong Hua-you
Abstract:The curtain of our nation's first particular case has already came down,in which the Securities Regulatory Commission was accused of unfair judgement by a "Vase Director"named Lu Jiahao. Centering on whether Lu Jiahao was an "Independent Director"or an "Ordinary Director"and how much responsibility he should bear, the author maintains that the court decided Lu Jiahao was an "independent director" was illegality,and Lu's responsibility was overburen.
Keywords:independent director  responsibility  challenge  
本文献已被 CNKI 万方数据 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号