我国债券市场虚假陈述民事责任问题研究

【作者】 李峰；

【导师】 薛智胜；

【作者基本信息】 天津工业大学 ， 法律硕士（法学）（专业学位）， 2023， 硕士

【摘要】 随着新《虚假陈述解释》的实施,五洋债案判决在中国资本市场判赔金额、判赔中介机构数量等方面均创下多项之最,在债券投资市场引发热议,也吸引了理论界和实务界等各方的众多关注。新《虚假陈述解释》的实施和五洋债案判决引发了我国有关债市虚假陈述民事责任问题的争议。论文旨在研究债市虚假陈述中民事责任体系的问题,通过对具体债券纠纷案例中侵权要件的构成分析,梳理总结相关主体责任问题的关键认定依据、法理关系及其责任承担等问题,进一步明晰债市虚假陈述民事责任体系的构成及其与股市虚假陈述相区别的特殊责任承担机制。在虚假陈述行为的判断上,债券交易的“信息不敏感”会对信息重大性的认定产生影响,敏感信息在符合“重大性”要件时才构成虚假陈述信息。此外,在对相关主体的过错责任认定时,司法具有一定的不确定性,各个机构的“勤勉尽责义务”具体标准并未有清楚的界限,法官具有较大的自主决定空间。同时,实务中对交易因果关系的判断也未结合债券本身特性,在对虚假陈述损失进行计算时,相关主体连带赔偿责任损失范围也未明确结合损失因果关系,剔除无关因素,可能造成债券发行人及中介机构承担过重的赔偿责任。对此,为解决上述问题,笔者建议在立法及司法中明确虚假信息的“重大性”标准以及相关主体的勤勉尽责义务。并且,建议法院在司法实践中据此对相关主体的主观状态进行区分,进行独立调查,明确不同主体不同主观状态的责任区分。在此基础上,完善相关主体的责任承担形式,综合计算虚假陈述损失,划分责任承担范围,以期平衡债券投资者与债券发行人及其他第三方机构的利益,构建清晰的债券民事责任体系。更多还原

【Abstract】 With the implementation of the new Interpretation of Misrepresentation,the judgment of the Wuyang Bond case has set a number of records in terms of the amount of damages awarded in China’s capital market and the number of intermediaries in terms of the number of intermediaries,which has aroused heated discussions in the bond investment market and attracted a lot of attention from theoretical and practical circles.The implementation of the new Interpretation of Misrepresentation and the judgment of the Wuyang Debt Case have triggered controversy in China on the issue of civil liability for misrepresentation of bonds.This paper aims to study the civil liability system in bond misrepresentation,analyze the composition of tort elements in specific bond dispute cases,sort out and summarize the key identification basis,legal relationship and liability assumption of relevant entity liability issues,and further clarify the composition of the civil liability system for bond misrepresentation and its special liability bearing mechanism that is different from the stock market as a representative misstatement.In the judgment of misrepresentation,the "information insensitivity" of bond transactions will have an impact on the determination of the materiality of the information,and sensitive information only constitutes misrepresentation information when it meets the requirements of "materiality",and the judiciary has certain uncertainties in the determination of the fault liability of the relevant subjects,the specific standard of "due diligence and due diligence" of intermediaries does not have clear boundaries,judges have a large space for independent decision-making,and at the same time,the judgment of the causal relationship of transactions in practice does not combine the characteristics of the bond itself.When calculating the loss of misrepresentation,the scope of joint and several liability losses of relevant entities is not clearly combined with the causal relationship of losses,and irrelevant factors are excluded,which may cause bond issuers and intermediaries to bear excessive liability for compensation.In this regard,in order to solve the above problems,the author suggests that the "materiality" standard of false information and the due diligence and due diligence of relevant entities be clarified in legislation and justice,and that the court distinguish the subjective state of relevant subjects in judicial practice,conduct independent investigations,clarify the responsibility distinction between different subjective states of different subjects,and then improve the form of liability of relevant entities,comprehensively calculate the loss of misrepresentation,divide the scope of liability,and balance the interests of bond investors and bond issuers and intermediaries.Establish a clear civil liability system for bonds.更多还原