作者：高圣平
作者介绍：中国人民大学民商事法律科学研究中心专职研究人员，中国人民大学法学院副教授
出版日期：2013年4月9日
内容提要 公司担保纠纷涉及公司法、担保法、合同法相关规定的解释与适用，不能片面地仅从一个角度来认定违反规定的担保合同的效力。《公司法》第16条在规范性质上属于强制性规定，但即使将其认定为管理性强制性规定，违之亦不当然认定担保合同有效，而应视具体情形认定担保合同的效力。担保权人应善尽合理注意义务查阅公司章程，并在形式上审查公司担保决策机构相关决议的合法性，否则越权担保对公司不生效力。在公司章程未就公司担保事项做出决定时，公司仍然具有担保能力，但此时应由股东(大)会就公司担保问题做出决议。
关键词 公司担保 效力性强制性规定 越权代表 公司章程
Abstract: The corporate surety disputes are involved in the interpretation and application of the relevant rules of Company Law，Security Law and Contract Law. Therefore，the effectiveness of surety contracts in violation of the relevant provisions shall not be determined from one angle. Article 16 of Company Law of the PRC is a mandatory provision, but whether the surety contract is effective is determined by specific circumstances rather than violating this provision even though it is treated as an administrative mandatory provision. The se cured creditor shall fulfill his reasonable duty of care to refer to the articles of association and review formally the legality of the resolution files issued by decision-making body in the corporation. Otherwise, the ultra vires surety is ineffective to the company. Although there is no stipulation on the company surety in the articles of association, the company still has the capacity as a secured provider and this will be determined by the board of shareholders.