公司董事的义务和责任——中德法律之比较（上篇 · 中英双语）

公司治理的重要组成部分是围绕公司董事责任及其责任的法律框架。中国和德国都建立了全面的法律框架，并遵循类似的原则，然而，中国和德国各自有不同的方式，特别是鉴于2024年7月1日生效的新修订的《中华人民共和国公司法》（“《公司法》”）。本文探讨并比较了中国和德国法律下公司董事责任的基本规定。
A significant component of corporate governance is the legal framework surrounding the responsibilities and with them the liabilities of company directors. Both China and Germany have established comprehensive legal frameworks for that and follow similar principles; however, each in their own approach. Especially in light of the newly revised Company Law of the People’s Republic of China (CL PRC) having taken effect on July 1, 2024, this essay explores and compares the basic provisions of company directors’ liabilities under Chinese and German law.
中国的法律框架
Legal framework in China
在中国，董事的义务和责任主要体现在《公司法》中。该法规定了董事在公司治理方面的职责和义务，以及不当行为的责任。
In China, the responsibilities of company directors are mainly defined in the Company Law. This law includes their duties and their roles regarding corporate governance and liability in case of misconduct.
根据《公司法》第180条，适用于每位董事的基本原则主要是诚信义务、忠实义务和勤勉义务。这意味着董事必须始终以公司的最佳利益为重，并勤勉尽责地行使其权力，还应避免利益冲突，尤其不得利用其职位和权力谋取私利。同时，董事又是公司执行机构董事会的一员，广泛的权力迫使其承担更加严格的义务和责任。
According to Article 180 CL PRC, the underlying principles that shall apply for every director are mainly based on fiduciary duty as well as loyalty and diligence. This means that directors must always act in the best interests of the company and exercise their powers with due diligence. Additionally, conflicts of interest should be avoided, and their positions and powers should especially not be exploited for personal gain. As part of the board of directors which is the executive organ of a company, its expansive authority forces the obligations and liabilities of a director to be stringent.
《公司法》明确规定了董事的具体义务，如催缴出资的义务（《公司法》第51条），不得利用职权从事贿赂、侵占公司资产等违反对公司忠实义务的行为（《公司法》第181条），不得利用关联关系损害公司利益（《公司法》第22条），自我交易需向董事会或股东会报告并经决议通过（《公司法》第182 条），不得利用职务便利谋取公司商业机会（特定情形除外）（《公司法》第183条），竞业禁止义务（《公司法》第184条），以及应要求报告履职情况的义务（《公司法》第80条）。
The specified obligations of a director are explicitly outlined in the Company Law, such as the obligation to call up capital contributions (Article 51 CL PRC), the prohibition to take advantage of their powers in violation of the obligation of loyalty to the company such as embezzlement or bribery(Article 181 CL PRC), the prohibition to take advantage of related-party relationship to damage the company's interests (Article 22 CL PRC), the requirement to report self-dealing transactions to the board of directors or the shareholders' meeting and to obtain an approval by resolution (Article 182 CL PRC), the prohibition to take advantage of their position to pursue business opportunities of the company except under specified circumstances (Article 183 CL PRC), non-competition obligation (Article 184 CL PRC), and the obligation to submit reports on the performance of their duties upon request (Article 80 CL PRC).
董事角色的重要性在其清算职责中尤为明显，新《公司法》第232条明确强调了这一职责。在最近的这次修订之前，《中华人民共和国公司法》（2018年修订）（“旧《公司法》”）第183条规定，有限责任公司的清算组由股东组成，股份有限公司的清算组由董事或者股东大会确定的人员组成。旧《公司法》的规定极易造成有限责任公司的中小股东承担清算失职的责任。而新《公司法》的规定从根本上说可视为对董事勤勉义务的具体编纂。
The significance of the director's role is particularly evident in their liquidation duties, a responsibility now explicitly highlighted by the new Company Law in Article 232. Prior to this recent amendment, Article 183 of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China (Amended in 2018) stated that the liquidation group of a limited liability company should be formed by the shareholders, while for a company limited by shares, the liquidation group should comprise members appointed by the directors or the board of shareholders. The problem was that this would easily create a situation in which especially small and medium shareholders of limited liability companies had to face liability for failures of liquidation duties. Essentially, the new provision can be seen as a specific codification of the directors’ duty of diligence.
在董事违反法定义务给公司、股东、他人造成损害的情况下，应根据相应的过错承担相应的赔偿责任。尤其需要提出的是，新《公司法》突破了由公司对外承担责任的限制，在董事执行职务给第三人造成损害的情况下，存在故意或者重大过失的，需对外直接承担赔偿责任。如果故意或者重大过失都不适用，则由公司对外承担责任，见《公司法》第191条。
In the case that a director violates the statutory obligations and thus causes damages to the Company, the shareholders or others, he/she shall bear the corresponding liability according to the corresponding fault. In particular, the new Company Law breaks through the limitation of external liability assumed by the company, in the case that the director's execution of duties causes damage to a third party due to his/her intent or gross negligence, he/she shall be directly liable for compensation externally. If neither intent nor gross negligence is applicable, the company shall be held liable, see Article 191 CL PRC.
具体承担责任的类型不仅限于民事责任（如赔偿所造成的任何损失，见《公司法》第51、188、191、192条），还可延伸至刑事责任（见《公司法》第179、264条），具体取决于违规行为的严重程度。
The types of liability are not only limited to civil liability (such as compensations for any losses incurred, see Articles 51, 188, 191, 192 CL PRC) but can also extend to criminal liability (refer to Articles 179, 264 CL PRC), depending on the severity of the breach.
在仔细研究《公司法》第51条（该条规定，董事会未提醒股东按时履行出资义务并因此给公司造成损失的，责任董事应承担赔偿责任）时，必须考虑到《公司法》的司法解释同时规定了高级管理人员的催缴义务。《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国公司法〉若干问题的规定（三）》（2020年修正）第13条第4 款规定，董事和高级管理人员都有责任催缴出资，但在新的《公司法》下，高级管理人员是否仍有此责任，后续可能要由司法解释来进一步明确。不过，根据《公司法》第53条，在股东非法抽逃出资并给公司造成损失的情况下，负有责任的董事、监事和高级管理人员与抽逃出资的股东之间存在明确的连带责任。
When taking a closer look at Article 51 CL PRC (which states that the responsible director is liable for compensation if the board of directors fails to remind shareholders to fulfill their capital contributions duties on time and if this causes losses to the company), it has to be taken into account that the judicial interpretation of the Company Law stipulates the call up capital contributions obligation of the senior executives in the meantime. Article 13 paragraph 4 of the PRC SPR Provisions (III) (Amended in 2020) specifies that both directors and senior executives are responsible for calling up capital contributions, it may be up to futher judicial interpretation to clarify if senior executives still have this duty under the new Company Law. However, there is definite joint liability between the liable directors, supervisors and senior executives and the withdrawing shareholders according to Article 53 CL PRC in case of illicit withdrawal of capital contributions by shareholders and incurrence of losses to the company.
德国的法律框架
Legal framework in Germany
德国法律也规定了公司董事的义务和责任。然而，中德两国的做法存在主要的制度性差异。
German law also codifies the obligations and liability of company directors. However, there is one main systematic difference between the Chinese and German approach.
中国采用的是集中式规制，有限责任公司和股份有限公司都在中国《公司法》中加以规定，而德国则没有一部全面的"公司法"。相反，这两种不同类型的公司遵循各自的法典，每个法典都对其董事的责任（赔偿责任）进行了规定：股份有限公司遵循"Aktiengesetz"（AktG），有限责任公司遵循"Gesetz betreffend die Gesellschaften mit beschränkter Haftung"（GmbHG）。
While China follows the centralized solution where both the limited liability company (LLC) and the joint stock limited company (JSC) are addressed within the Chinese Company Law, Germany does not have only one comprehensive “company law”. Instead, these two different types of companies follow their own respective codifications that each tailor the responsibilities (and thus also the liability) of their directors: the so-called “Aktiengesetz“ (AktG) for JSCs and the “Gesetz betreffend die Gesellschaften mit beschränkter Haftung” (GmbHG) for LLCs.
由于德国股份公司或有限责任公司的公司结构不同，要了解德国"董事"的职责，就必须首先了解德国公司的结构。
Due to the differing structures of German JSC or LLC, an understanding of German company structures is essential in order to understand the roles of a German “director”.
德国公司关于其执行部门的结构
The German company structures concerning their executive branches
术语解释
Terminology
由于本文只探讨执行意义上的董事角色，因此本段将只关注与中国的“董事”概念相近的公司执行部门。这个词不能与德国的“Direktor”相混淆，后者只是一个用于描述更具体部门经理的通用术语，因此不是本文的主题。
Since this essay only explores the roles of a director in the executive sense, this paragraph will only focus on the executive company branches that come close to the Chinese idea of a director. This term is not to be confused with the German “Direktor” which is only a general term used to describe managers of more specific divisions, and thus not subject of this essay.
简而言之，中国的董事是董事会成员，负责重要决策和公司管理。德国有限责任公司不存在这样的董事会。相反，董事会的角色主要分为两个管理机构：“Geschäftsführer"（董事总经理）和"Gesellschafter"（股东）。后者任命董事总经理或多位经理，作为主要执行官负责公司的日常运营。然而，由于股东拥有公司，因此他们拥有最终控制权和最高决策能力。他们召集会议，决定董事总经理的任命或解聘，批准并监督公司的重大行动。
In short, the director in China is a member of the board of directors responsible for important decisions and the company’s management. Such a board does not exist in a German LLC. Instead, its role is mainly split into two governance bodies: The “Geschäftsführer” (managing director) and “Gesellschafter” (shareholders). The latter appoint the managing director or multiple manager directors, who will bear the responsibility for the company’s day-to-day operations as the primary executive officer. However, it is the shareholders that have ultimate control and highest decision-making ability since they own the company. They convene to decide the appointing or dismissal of the managing director, to approve and oversee major company actions.
相比之下，德国股份有限公司的结构更为复杂，因此其管理方式与有限责任公司不同。但从本质上讲，主要管理机构的职能与有限责任公司相同，只是任务分配更为分散。治理结构通常包括一个执行董事会（"Vorstand"），负责执行公司的各项任务，并由一个监事会（"Aufsichtsrat"）进行监督，以及一个股东大会（"Hauptversammlung"），由与会股东做出重大决策。
In contrast, a German JSC has a more complex structure and is therefore not governed by the same means as in an LLC. However in essence, the main governance serves the same functions as in an LLC but only with a more scattered allocation of tasks. The governance structure typically includes an executive board (“Vorstand”) operating the company’s tasks, which is overseen by a supervisory board (“Aufsichtsrat”), as well as a general meeting (“Hauptversammlung”) where the major decisions are being made by the attending shareholders.
由于有限责任公司的德国股东和董事总经理，或股份有限公司的执行董事会、监事会和股东大会以组合方式履行中方董事的职责，下文将重点讨论各自的责任和义务。
Since a German shareholder and managing director of an LLC, or the executive board, supervisory board and general meetings of a JSC fulfill the roles of a Chinese director in a combinatory way, the following paragraph will focus on the responsibility and liability of each respectively.