:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:法人格否認理論在臺灣與日本勞動法上之運用與發展
書刊名:政大法學評論
作者:侯岳宏 引用關係
作者(外文):Hou, Yueh-hung
出版日期:2015
卷期:141
頁次:頁351-390
主題關鍵詞:法人格否認揭開公司面紗雇主不當勞動行為勞動委員會裁決制度Piercing the corporate veilEmployerUnfair labor practicesLabor relations commissionLabor dispute resolution
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(1) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:131
  • 點閱點閱:117
是否為勞動契約上之雇主,在勞雇之間產生爭議時,影響到勞工得向何人請求確認勞動契約上受僱地位,以及請求給付工資。理論上,雇主限於勞動契約上所明示的當事人。不過,隨著經濟發展,經營組織產生變遷,僱用模式變得多元化,因此若僅使契約上的雇主對於勞工負責任,有時會欠缺妥當。在此情形之下,學理上常見採用法人格否認理論,來擴張雇主之概念。近年來在勞動法案件,也有法院判決採用此理論。因此,此理論在勞資間的糾紛如何適用,實有進一步檢討之必要。 有鑑於此項理論在日本已有許多討論,也受到該國法院實務的援用。因此,本文考察法人格否認理論在日本學說與實務的相關發展,並整理出其特徵,以作為我國學說與實務進一步討論與運用之參考。
When the issue of whether or not being an employer in a labor contract becomes a dispute between employees and employers, it influ-ences the issue concerning whom employees should sue to confirm the employed-status in the labor contract. In theory, only the party written or expressed in the labor contract can be the employer. However, as the economy grows and organizational management changes, employment patterns also become diversified. It would be improper to make the only employer in the written labor contract be liable to the employee. In this situation, the study makes use of the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil to extend the concept of the employer. Although several judgments denied such a doctrine to be used in the case of the Labor Act in recent years, the Taiwan Supreme Court declared the following: To prevent the employer from dodging the law concerning the improper dismissal by the state of the juridical person, and eliminate the problem of abusing the right of dismissal from the employer, it should also concern the other juridical person who has “the same single entity” with the “original employer” and also has no ade-quate work to help the employee to settle down. Under these circum-stances, in order to understand how to apply the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil to resolve the dispute between the employer and employ-ee, it is necessary to undertake further examination. In light of the fact that this doctrine has been widely discussed in Japan for years and many courts also abide by the verdicts concerning it in Japan, this study will examine the development of the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil in the academy and its application in courts, as a reference of the academic discussion and its application in courts in Taiwan.
期刊論文
1.蔡瑄庭(20100300)。污染者之「本尊」或「分身」?誰應付費?--論適用「揭穿公司面紗原則」於母公司環保法律責任之認定。臺北大學法學論叢,73,83-139。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.陳建文(20031200)。控股公司所引發之勞動法議題初探。律師雜誌,291,61-91。  延伸查詢new window
3.侯岳宏(20101200)。不當勞動行為裁決機制的「行政」救濟與「私法」決定之檢討--以日本制度為借鏡。臺北大學法學論叢,76,95-145。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.侯岳宏(20110400)。法人格否認理論在勞動法上的適用--最高法院九十八年臺上字第六五二號判決評析。月旦裁判時報,8,13-17。  延伸查詢new window
5.林德瑞(20020600)。論一人公司。輔仁法學,23,177-236。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.劉連煜(20050200)。揭穿公司面紗原則及否認公司人格理論在我國實務之運用。臺灣本土法學雜誌,67,40-49。  延伸查詢new window
7.蓮井良蕙(1970)。会社法人格の否認。ジュリス卜,451,97-104。  延伸查詢new window
8.龍田節(1970)。法人格否認法理の最近の展開。旬刊商事法務研究,534,2-12。  延伸查詢new window
9.郭玲惠(20090600)。臺灣高等法院九十四年重勞上字第二號判決評釋--多重雇主之法律關係。臺灣勞動法學會學報,8,29-66。  延伸查詢new window
10.魏千峰(20070600)。多重雇主初探--臺灣高等法院八十九年度勞上易字第三六號判決及臺北地院八十八年度勞訴字第八九號判決評釋。臺灣勞動法學會學報,6,171-185。  延伸查詢new window
11.中島正雄(200310)。不当労働行為における使用者責任。労働法律旬報,1561,4-18。  延伸查詢new window
12.平川亮一(198606)。労働事件と法人格否認の法理。名城法学,36,467-493。  延伸查詢new window
13.本久洋一(200410)。企業間ネッ卜ワ一クと雇用責任--労働関係における法人格否認の法理の再検討。日本労働法学会誌,104,45-54。  延伸查詢new window
14.田中誠二(197105)。法人格否認法理の問題点。旬刊商事法務研究,560,2-5。  延伸查詢new window
15.田中誠二(197106)。法人格否認法理の問題点。旬刊商事法務研究,563,11-15。  延伸查詢new window
16.田中誠二(198010)。法人格否認法理再論。旬刊商事法務,885,2-9。  延伸查詢new window
17.西谷敏(198507)。会社解散•解雇と法人格否認の法理。法学雑誌,32(1),154-173。  延伸查詢new window
18.西谷敏(200310)。子会社解散と法人格否認の法理。労働法律旬報,1561,30-38。  延伸查詢new window
19.松岡浩(197712)。労働関係における法人格否認論と企業間の実質的同一性の理論。別冊判例タイムズ,5,89-98。  延伸查詢new window
20.香山忠志(199711)。解散•営業譲渡と法人格否認の法理。季刊労働法,184,112-132。  延伸查詢new window
21.梅田武敏(197602)。偽装解散と法人格否認の法理。労働法律旬報,898,23-37。  延伸查詢new window
22.野田進(200909)。法人格否認の法理の適用における雇用責任の帰属方。労働法律旬報,1704,6-19。  延伸查詢new window
23.新谷真人(200908)。法人格否認の法理と親会社の雇用責任。労働判例,981,6-12。  延伸查詢new window
24.林國全(19991200)。一人公司立法之研究。政大法學評論,62,367-388。new window  延伸查詢new window
25.劉興善(19781000)。論公司人格之否認。政大法學評論,18,111-136。new window  延伸查詢new window
26.簡祥紋(20060300)。法人格否定論之初探--兼論揭開公司面紗原則。法令月刊,57(3),15-30。new window  延伸查詢new window
27.賴英照(19820300)。關係企業法律問題乃立法草案之研究。中興法學,18,91-189。new window  延伸查詢new window
28.王志誠(20120800)。法人格獨立原則之適用及界限。月旦法學,207,17-37。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.西谷敏(200812)。労働法。東京:日本評論社。  延伸查詢new window
2.盛誠吾(200005)。労働法総論•労使関係法。新世社。  延伸查詢new window
3.浅倉むつ子(201109)。労働法。  延伸查詢new window
4.江頭蕙治郎(198012)。会社法人否認の法理。  延伸查詢new window
5.江頭蕙治郎(201112)。株式会社法。  延伸查詢new window
6.劉連煜(201209)。現代公司法。新學林出版股份有限公司:劉連煜。  延伸查詢new window
7.菅野和夫(201212)。労働法。弘文堂:有斐閣。  延伸查詢new window
8.王文宇(2008)。公司法論。元照。  延伸查詢new window
9.荒木尚志(2013)。労働法。有斐閣。  延伸查詢new window
10.廖大穎(2012)。公司法原論。臺北:三民。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.劉志鵬(200909)。雇主之概念。勞動基準法釋義--施行二十年之回顧與展望。  延伸查詢new window
2.本久洋一(200910)。親会社による子会社解散と労働関係。労働判例百選。  延伸查詢new window
3.後藤元(2008)。法人格否認の法理。会社法コンメンタール総則・設立。商事法務。  延伸查詢new window
4.森本滋(200604)。法人格の否認。会社法判例百選。  延伸查詢new window
5.奥山恒朗(196908)。いわゆる法人格否認の法理と実際。実務民事訴訟法講座。  延伸查詢new window
6.菅野和夫(200712)。会社解散と雇用関係。友愛と法。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE