公司对赌协议纠纷是近年来出现的新类型案件。自最高人民法院就“世恒公司对赌案”~①作出首例司法判决后,各地法院又陆陆续续出现了若干案例。裁判思路基本上沿袭了最高人民法院关于“与公司对赌无效、与股东对赌有效”的原则。最高人民法院及各地相关裁判均秉持传统规范法学的方法论,未能充分揭示对赌协议的估值调整机制的经济功能,在裁判思路上也有可商榷之处。法律规则的背后通常是经济逻辑,对于以追求资源配 Company disputes over gambling agreements are new types of cases that have emerged in recent years. Since the Supreme People’s Court made the first judicial decision on the “Shiheng Company’s betting case”, the courts around the world made several cases one after another. Referee ideas basically followed the Supreme People’s Court on the “invalid bet with the company, the shareholders gamble effective” principle. The Supreme People’s Court and relevant referees around the world uphold the methodology of the traditional normative jurisprudence and fail to fully reveal the economic function of the valuation adjustment mechanism for gambling agreements. There are also points of view in refereeing. Behind the legal rules are usually economic logic, for the pursuit of resources with