经济发展日新月异，企业独立经营已经难以满足市场的激烈竞争，越来越多的公司选择以关联企业共同发展的姿态立足于市场中。但关联企业的出现也会带来一些问题，如关联企业间成员存在内部违法交易导致企业资产、负债混同在一起，当关联企业某一成员出现破产事由时，如果采取破产法规定的独立破产方式，会造成债权人不必要的损害或债权人清偿不公平。为了解决目前关联企业独立破产难以及独立破产导致不公平的现状，我国引入了实质合并破产制度，将混合在一起的各关联企业资产及负债进行合并，关联企业成为破产整体共同进入破产程序。但实质合并破产制度也会引起部分债权人的异议，如适用实质合并之前破产清偿率高于适用实质合并之后清偿率，此时债权人就可能反对适用实质合并，对于这部分异议债权人如何保护是本文主要讨论的问题。
本文主要研究如何对异议债权人的权利进行保护，实现全体债权人公平受偿，主要讨论如下三部分。
第一部分讨论实质合并破产制度产生的异议债权人保护问题。包括关联企业是如何顺应社会发展产生的，关联企业独立破产难、独立破产不公平问题如何通过实质合并解决，实质合并破产制度在保护异议债权人方面存在的不足，分析何种异议债权人是需要进行保护的，最后分析如何在不同的角度保护异议债权人的权利，包括程序角度以及实体角度。
第二部分讨论异议债权人权利的程序保护问题。目前在我国，实质合并破产程序包括启动、审理、裁判以及复议。本文主要分析启动程序、审理程序以及复议程序目前的规定以及不足，并提出相关改进意见。在启动程序中，明确了利害关系人要以提交申请书的方式启动，明确了需要提交的相关材料和证据；在审理程序中，明确通知、公告的时间要求，明确了听证会举办方式、出席人员等相关规定；在复议程序中，建议赋予异议债权人上诉权而非复议权保护异议债权人权利。
第三部分讨论异议债权人权利的实体保护问题。讨论了实质合并破产制度的适用标准，明确实质合并目前已经存在的标准，即法人人格严重混同、区分成本过高、债权人受益标准的审查细则，同时提出两个新角度的标准，即欺诈标准以及信赖利益标准作为目前标准的补充。明确了对于合法权益确实受到损害的异议债权人通过部分合并方式对其权利进行补偿，即没有合并事由的关联企业成员独立破产，其他混同企业合并破产，或某关联企业成员独立偿还部分异议债权人后，剩余资产、负债与其他关联企业进行合并破产，通过部分企业独立破产，部分企业实质合并破产的方式保护异议债权人利益。

With the rapid development of the economy, it is difficult for enterprises to operate independently to satisfy the fierce competition in the market, so more and more companies are choosing to base themselves in the market under the attitude of developing together with affiliated enterprises. But the appearance of affiliated enterprises will also bring some problems. For example, the illegal transactions among affiliated enterprises make the enterprises mixed together. If the independent bankruptcy mode is adopted when one of the affiliated enterprises goes bankrupt, it will cause unnecessary damage to the creditor or lead to unfair repayment to the creditor. In order to solve the problem that the independent bankruptcy of related enterprises is difficult or unfair, our country introduces the substantive merger bankruptcy system, which combines the assets and debts of related enterprises and makes them go into the bankruptcy procedure together. However, substantial consolidation may also arouse objection from certain creditors. For instance, creditors whose solvency ratio prior to substantial consolidation is higher than that after substantial consolidation, may object to the application of substantial consolidation. This article is mainly focused on how to protect such creditors who object.
This paper mainly studies how to protect the rights of dissenting creditors, to achieve a fair repayment of all creditors, mainly discussed in the following three parts.
The first part discusses the protection of objection creditors arising from substantive merger bankruptcy system.How to solve the difficulty and unfairness of independent bankruptcy of affiliated enterprises through substantive merger, the inadequacy of substantive merger in protecting dissenting creditors, and what kind of dissenting creditors need to be protected. Finally, it analyzes how to protect the rights of objecting creditors from different perspectives, including the perspective of procedure and entity.
The second part discusses the procedural protection of the rights of dissenting creditors. Currently in PRC, the substantive consolidated bankruptcy proceedings include commencement, trial, adjudication and reconsideration. This article mainly analyzes the initiation procedure, the hearing procedure and the reconsideration procedure current stipulation and the insufficiency, proposes the related improvement opinion. In respect of the application procedures, it is clear that an application shall be initiated by submitting a written application and the relevant materials and evidence required to be submitted are specified; in respect of the hearing procedures, there are clear time requirements for notification and announcement as well as the way of holding the hearing, attendees and the relevant procedural rules; in the review procedure, we suggest that the rights of dissenting creditors should be better protected by granting them the right of appeal instead of the right of review.
The third part discusses the substantive protection of the dissenting creditor's rights. It discusses the applicable standards of substantive consolidation, and makes clear the existing standards of substantive consolidation, that is, severe confusion of corporate personality, high cost of differentiation, and beneficiary of creditor. At the same time, two new standards, namely the standard of fraud and the standard of reliance interest, are proposed as the supplement of the current applicable standard. It also clarifies the method for the compensation for the rights of dissenting creditors whose legitimate rights and interests are indeed damaged by partial merger, that is, the affiliated enterprises which are not merged become bankrupt independently, and other mixed enterprises become bankrupt through merger. Alternatively, after an affiliated enterprise repays part of the objection creditors independently, it shall consolidate with other affiliated enterprises for bankruptcy with its remaining assets and debts, and the rights and interests of the objection creditors shall be protected and compensated through the independent bankruptcy of some enterprises and substantive consolidation for bankruptcy of other enterprises.