一、彭宇翔诉南京市城市建设开发（集团）有限责任公司追索劳动报酬纠纷案 

Peng Yuxiang v. Nanjing CNK Group Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over recovery of labor remunerations)

【裁判要旨】

用人单位规定劳动者在完成一定绩效后可以获得奖金，但无正当理由拒绝履行相关审批义务，劳动者主张获奖条件成就，要求用人单位按照规定发放奖金的，人民法院应予支持。

[Judgment Abstract]

Where the employer undertakes the employee to receive a reward upon achieving certain work performance, but it refuses to perform relevant approval obligation without any good cause, if the employee files a claim for the grant of the reward by the employer as per the given policy after the conditions for reward are satisfied, such claim should be sustained by the people's court.

来源：《最高人民法院公报》2023年第1期（总第317期）第40-48页

Source Note：SPC Gazette, Issue 1, 2023 (Total No. 317) Page 40-48

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.503636528 

[CLI Code] CLI.C.503636528(EN)   

二、甘肃乾金达矿业开发集团有限公司与万城商务东升庙有限责任公司盈余分配纠纷案

Gansu Qianjinda Mining Development Group Co., Ltd. v. Wancheng Business Dongshengmiao Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over surplus distribution)

【裁判摘要】

股东要求公司分配利润的必要条件是提交载明具体分配方案的股东会决议。具体的利润分配方案应当包括待分配利润数额、分配政策、分配范围以及分配时间等具体分配事项内容。判断利润分配方案是否具体，关键在于综合现有信息能否确定主张分配的权利人根据方案能够得到的具体利润数额。如公司股东会决议确定了待分配利润总额、分配时间，结合公司章程中关于股东按照出资比例分取红利的分配政策之约定，能够确定股东根据方案应当得到的具体利润数额的，该股东会决议载明的利润分配方案应当认为是具体的。

载明具体分配方案的股东会决议一经作出，抽象性的利润分配请求权即转化为具体性的利润分配请求权，从股东的成员权转化为独立于股东权利的普通债权。股东转让股权时，抽象性的利润分配请求权随之转让，而具体的利润分配请求权除合同中有明确约定外并不随股权转让而转让。当分配利润时间届至而公司未分配时，权利人可以直接请求公司按照决议载明的具体分配方案给付利润。

[Judgment Abstract]

A shareholder of a company should, before filing a claim for profit distribution, submit a resolution of the shareholders' meeting of the company that states the specific distribution plan. The distribution plan should clarify matters such as the amount of distributable profit and the distribution policy, scope and time. For judging whether a distribution plan is specific or not, the key lies in whether the existing information in combination is enough to determine the specific amount of profit the claimant seeks according to the distribution plan. If at the resolution of the company's meeting of shareholders, the total profit for distribution and the specific distribution time are both decided, whereupon the specific amount of profit distributable to the shareholder by the distribution plan can be determined by concurrently referring to the agreements in the company's articles of association on the policy for shareholders' receiving dividends in proportion to their capital contribution, then such profit distribution plan in the resolution of the shareholders' meeting should be deemed as specific.

Once the resolution of the shareholders' meeting on the profit distribution plan is made, the abstract right of claim for profit distribution is automatically concretized, while the membership rights of shareholders also turn into common creditors' rights independent of shareholders' rights. When a shareholder transfers its equities, the abstract right of claim for profit distribution is also transferred accordingly, but the concretized right is not, unless otherwise expressly agreed in the equity transfer contract. Where the company has not actually distributed its profits after the expiry time of profit distribution, the claimant may directly request the company to distribute profits according to the distribution plan stated in the resolution.

来源：《最高人民法院公报》2023年第1期（总第317期）第27-35页

Source Note：SPC Gazette, Issue 1, 2023 (Total No. 317) Page 27-35

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.503636525   

[CLI Code] CLI.C.503636525(EN)  

三、刘美芳诉常州凯瑞化学科技有限公司等公司决议效力确认纠纷案

Liu Meifang v. Changzhou Chemistar Chemistry Technology Co., Ltd., et al. (case of dispute over confirmation of validity of company resolutions)

【裁判摘要】

有限责任公司的股东未履行出资义务或者抽逃全部出资，经公司催告缴纳或者返还，在合理期间内仍未缴纳或者返还出资的，公司可以股东会决议解除其股东资格。但如公司股东均为虚假出资或抽逃全部出资，部分股东通过股东会决议解除特定股东的股东资格，由于该部分股东本身亦非诚信守约股东，其行使除名表决权丧失合法性基础，该除名决议应认定为无效。

[Judgment Abstract]

Where a shareholder of a limited liability company fails to fulfill its obligation of capital contribution or withdraws all the capital it has contributed, and still fails to undertake or restitute the capital contributions within a reasonable period after being notified by the company, the company has the right to disqualify him as a shareholder through the resolution of the shareholders' meeting. If, however, all the shareholders make false capital contributions or fraudulently withdraw all the capital they've contributed, any resolution made by part of shareholders on the membership removal of certain shareholders should be deemed invalid on the grounds that the said part of shareholders also disobey the principle of good faith themselves, thus lacking in legitimate foundations for exercising their right to vote for resolutions on shareholder membership removal.

来源：《最高人民法院公报》2023年第2期（总第318期）第44-48页

Source Note：SPC Gazette, Issue 2, 2023 (Total No. 318) Page 44-48

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.503636529  

 [CLI Code] CLI.C.503636529(EN)