The aim for this article is analyzing the application of disregarding of corporate personality in Macao. By knowing the history of changes for Business Law, the legal disposition for the nature and definition of company, we can understand that the corporate personality, property and responsibility originally have a nature of independence. After having practiced for years, we can see the corporate personality which is set up legally has come to an evolution: the one-person company. This kind of company has a different nature with the normal company, but both of them have the same goal (for managing their business with the aim of gain) Base on the changes which lead by the nature of this kind of company, we can see the conflict of different interests in the past and present. For example, from the view of the structure of company, the shareholder uses to get benefit from illegal trade with the company instead of sharing profit of company by dividends. From the view of personal benefit and public benefit, the acceptance to establish one-person company shows the ultimate of personal interest. The law exceptionally accepts this kind of company based on the fact, but the weak assets of most of this kind of company actually are difficult to afford for the interest of the creditors and public. From the view of social economy, one-person company can make decision more easily and to give impetus to the social economy. However, the illegal trade between one-person company and shareholder usually harm the creditors. In order to overcome the most important question of one-person company: the protection for creditors. The current legal system and international trend give protection to the creditors. This article discuss how the legal system of Macao do to secure the benefit of creditors through accessible means, including the public registration, disregarding of corporate personality and preservation measures. 5 Continuing to know more about the disregarding of corporate personality, we start with the origin and the reason for one-person company. Because this kind of company has a totally different reason with traditional personality of company, they have different aims to achieve, and so as the components of the rules, background and timing of application are also different. By comparing the different situations of disregarding of corporate personality, we can see how it works in Macao: principally the article 213 of Commercial Law and the related disposition. Some theory may consider the basic principle of this article is the abuse of power, but in my point of view disregarding of corporate personality has some points very different with it. At last, we shall discuss and see whether the flaw theory on Civil Law be used on disregarding of corporate personality. Finally, this article ends with suggestions for the system of disregarding of corporate personality, and provides that principle rules should be set by simplified articles, instead of the articles which must fit certain moment and certain action completed, so as to disregard the corporate personality. More about this, should establish the responsibility of prove for company in certain case. If the company can’t prove the legality of the trade, one-person company and shareholder should assume the responsibility without limit. At the end, the registration system should be modified, in order to protect the rights of knowing of public, and strengthen the supervision of people.

本文的目的是探討在澳門的一人有限公司之人格否定制度。首先透過了解商 法的歷史變遷、民法律中對公司性質的規定及定性，以了解公司人格、財產及責 任原則上具有的獨立性。接著，在論述公司從人格獨立所引申的其他領域的獨立 性後，於多年的實踐經驗中，可以看到這個法律擬制出來的人格發展至近代有一 突破性制度：一人公司，這種公司的性質與一般公司不同，但目的卻是相同的（以 盈利為目的經營商業企業）。 基於這種公司的性質所引致的改變，可以看到不同利益之間現在與過去的衝 突，例如從公司結構來看，在股東個人身份和公司機關據位人身份中，股東往往 並非按股數分享盈餘之方式取得盈利，而是透過與公司所進行的不法交易圖利； 從個人利益與公共利益來看，允許成立一人公司一方面是個人利益的極致至，二 來是法律就現在的實際情況，為使其受法律規範而例外接納之，然而透過其單薄 的公司資產的背景，其實並不足以保障債權人利益和公共利益；另外，從社會政 治來看，在經濟發展與法律保障方面，一人公司往往便於公司作出決策和推動社 會經濟，然而一人公司與單一股東的不法交易往往對債權人造成不利。 針對以上述及一人公司最大的黑暗面：對債權人的保護，現行法律及國際潮 流均有不同的制度加以保障。本文以澳門法律中可行的制度和措施，包括登記公 示制度、公司法人格否定及保存措施三方面，簡略論述澳門法制上如何對債權人 利益作出保障。 繼續深入探討公司法人格否定制度，略述其起源及因由，基於該制度與傳統 公司法人格獨立相對立，各自有其所欲達到之目的，而各國就此制度的成立要件、 適用的背景及適用時間亦不盡相同。 在對公司法人格否定的不同情況作對比後，有條件窺探澳門在此領域之規範： 3 主要是《商法典》第二百一十三條及有關規定，學說上對於該條文的基礎原則上 認為是屬於權利濫用。然而，本人認為其與權利濫用有不盡相同的地方。關於公 司法人格否定，最後探討的是看可否以其他民法上的瑕疵適用之。 最後，本文以對一人公司的人格否定制度作出若干建議作結，。並提出以概 括性條文訂立原則性規定，而無須如現今條文規定般於特定時刻、特定行為發生 後，方否定公司人格；另外，可以訂定在一定情況下由公司負舉證責任，倘公司 未能證明其交易的合規範性，則由公司與該單一股東負無限責任；最後，應促進 改革登記制度，保障公眾的知情權，以強化民眾監督。