本文共分七个部分。第一部分对比直接诉讼阐述了派生诉讼的特点,讨论了二者在一般情况下如何区别,并重点介绍了两者在特殊情况下区别时所涉及的“特别损失标准”和“封闭式公司例外原则”。第二部分介绍了确认原告股东主体资格时对股东持股数量和持股时间的要求,详细讨论了原告股东主体资格和侵害公司利益的违法行为发生时间的关系,介绍了美国公司法的“同期拥有股份原则”和“持续违法行为理论”。另外本文还对影响股东诉讼主体资格的其他情况作了简单讨论,如继受股东、公司合并和丧失股东身份的情形。第三部分讨论了原告股东在提起派生诉讼之前所要履行的“穷尽公司内部救济”问题。文章对提出请求的对象、请求的期间等常规问题结合案例作了介绍。还从认定标准到该标准的发展结合三个最新案例,着重对诉前程序的例外“请求无益”作了讨论。第四部分论述了业务判断规则在董事会针对股东提出的请求作出回应时发挥的作用。诉前请求的结果就是置派生诉讼的控制权于公司董事会之手。董事会就原告股东的请求作出的回应能否最终得到法院的支持,取决于法院依据什么样的规则来判断。业务判断规则正是法院所依据的重要规则。第五部分介绍了特殊诉讼委员在处理股东提起的请求或派生诉讼时,派生诉讼的成立和独立性问题。第六部分逐项讨论了派生诉讼的结果:驳回、中止、原告胜诉、原告败诉、和解撤诉五种情况。第七部分讨论了股东、公司与被告在派生诉讼中的地位及相互关系。 This article is divided into seven parts. The first part contrasts with the direct lawsuit and expounds the characteristics of derivative lawsuit, discusses the differences between the two under normal circumstances, and emphatically introduces the “special loss standard” and “closed” Company exception principle “. The second part introduces the requirements on the number of shares held by the shareholders and the holding time when confirming the qualification of the plaintiff shareholders, discusses the relationship between the qualification of the plaintiff shareholders and the time of the infringement of the interests of the company, and introduces the ” The same period has the principle of shares “and ” continued illegal behavior theory “. In addition, this article also made a brief discussion on the other conditions that affect the qualification of shareholder litigation, such as the case of following the shareholders, the merger and the loss of shareholder status. The third part discusses the issue of ”exhaustion of company internal remedies“ to be performed by the plaintiff shareholders prior to filing a derivative lawsuit. The article introduces the general issues such as the object of the request, the period of the request, and the like. It also combines the three recent cases with the identification of standards to the development of the standard with a focus on the exception of the pre-vieW procedure, ”Unsuccessful Requests". The fourth section deals with the role of business judgment rules in responding to board requests to shareholders. The result of the pre-appeal request is to place control of the derivative action on the board of directors of the company. Whether the board’s response to the plaintiff’s shareholders’ request can finally get the support of the court depends on what rules the court rules. Business judgment rules are the important rules on which the court is based. The fifth part introduces the establishment and independence of the derivative litigation when the special litigants deal with the shareholder’s request or derivative action. The sixth part discusses the outcome of the derivative action item by item: rejecting, suspending, winning the plaintiff, losing the plaintiff and withdrawing the suit. Section 7 discusses the status and relationships of shareholders, companies and defendants in derivative litigation.