华北水利水电大学学报（社会科学版）

在隐名股东执行异议之诉中，隐名股东对登记在名义股东名下的股权享有的民事权益能否排除强制执行，存在“肯定说”与“否定说”之分歧。争议的焦点在于，外观主义原则能否适用于执行程序以及《中华人民共和国公司法》第三十二条第三款中的第三人能否扩张解释为非交易第三人。隐名股东执行异议之诉的权利冲突应定位于隐名股东的实体权利与申请执行人执行利益之间，但我国既有法律规范并未为隐名股东执行异议之诉的裁判提供确定且充分的规范支撑，此时应当引入价值衡量方法，以促进社会公共利益为标尺，原则上应支持“否定说”,仅在申请执行人不具有信赖利益以及股权代持形成不可归责于隐名股东等情形时，隐名股东可以排除强制执行。

In execution objection litigation involving hidden shareholders, a key issue is whether the civil rights of a hidden shareholder, held in the name of a nominal shareholder, can be excluded from enforcement. There are differing views, categorized as “affirmative” and “negative”. The decisions of the Supreme People's Court and local courts also show conflicting positions. The focus of the dispute lies in whether the principle of appearanceism can be applied to the execution process and whether the “third party” in Article 32(3) of the Company Law can be broadly interpreted to include non-transactional third parties. The essence of the conflict in execution objection litigation involving hidden shareholders lies in the tension between the substantive rights of the hidden shareholder and the procedural enforcement interests of the applicant. China's Civil Procedure Law and Company Law have not provided definite and sufficient normative support to guide judgments in execution objection litigation involving hidden shareholders. Using the promotion of social public interests as a guiding principle, the “negative theory” should be supported in principle. The rights of the hidden shareholder may be excluded from enforcement only when the applicant does not have reliance interests and the formation of the shareholding arrangement cannot be attributed to the hidden shareholder.