投资银行补偿保障要求的法律和实务分析

中国的投资银行（或其业务范围与投资银行相类似的金融性公司，以下统称“投资银行”）业务是中国借鉴国际经验开展的一项全新的金融业务。随着中国经济的发展，中国的公司企业已对投资银行所从事的金融投资业务产生越来越强烈的兴趣和需求并逐步成为投资银行的客户，这些客户同投资银行的接触和业务联系也随之愈来愈广泛和紧密。在这种频繁商业交往中，一些客户对投资银行的某些商业行为产生了迷惑和不理解，投资银行提出的补偿保障（Indemnityguargnt）要求即为其中之一。投资银行的补偿保障要求是指投资银行在接受客户委托从事金融投资…     

论政府对投资银行的风险监管

本轮金融危机中,投资银行业务过度创新而政府监管乏力,风险累积祸及世界.政府对投资银行的风险监管问题引起业界的高度关注.通过分析政府对投资银行监管的理论基础,探讨对投行监管的必要性及监管的目标.在分析政府对投资银行监管方面暴露的问题之后,提出政府应该为投资银行创设良好的运行环境,创建良好的信息披露和风险提示制度,特别是把好市场准人和退出关口及针对投资银行的业务链条设计风险监管制度,防止出现监管"真空",并且加强监管过程中的国际合作.     

论律师在证券业务中不实陈述的民事责任

证券法律制度中的信息披露制度是对投资者进行保护的有力手段,是证券法律制度的基石和核心。在证券发行交易过程中,各信息披露义务人负有及时真实披露信息的义务,参与证券业务的律师在证券发行交易过程中要出具法律意见书和律师工作报告等专业性文书,自然也应承担信息披露义务。但目前我国证券市场法律服务机构存在着极其严重的混乱现象,少数律师事务所和律师为了自身的利益,敢于公然违法迁就证券发行人的非法要求,参与证券发行交易等的虚假陈述,甚至出谋划策。这种令人担忧的情况,若不能够及时解决,将制约证券市场长期发展,给经济建设带来…     

新《公司法》董事对公司损害赔偿制度的缺失

董事对公司的损害赔偿责任根源于董事违背了对公司承担的诚信义务,新《公司法》虽增加和完善了对诚信义务的规定,但仍存在严重的缺失。基于不完备法律理论的视角,这种缺失更大程度上是因为成文法不足以对如此复杂的诚信义务规则作出有效规定,必须依靠完善司法,逐步确立先例制度,由法院逐步积累经验,总结规则,董事诚信义务及对公司的损害赔偿制度才能有效适用。     

证券推荐的适合性义务——从职业道德到法律责任

适合性义务最早由美国证券自律组织制定的行业守则确立，其基本要求是证券商只应推荐其有合理依据相信是适合客户的证券。对证券商的证券推荐施加适合性责任要求是为了有效保护客户对证券推荐的合理信赖，属于证券商对客户承担的一种信义义务。在证券实践的推动下，美国证券监管立法、司法尤其是仲裁活动逐渐重视和强化适合性义务的效力，适合性义务由此从原有的执业道德向法律义务进化。适合性义务法律进化的表现之一，就是投资者可以追究不适合推荐的民事责任，此种民事责任的承担需符合相应要件。     

美国投资银行业对我国的启示

一直以来,美国的投资银行将证券承销作为本源业务、为客户提供咨询服务并参与金融衍生品的创新业务,以低自有资本高杠杆高盈利著称。与从事储蓄和贷款业务的传统银行相比,投资银行是受到更少监管的独立经纪公司。美国的投资银行业变迁给我国投行的盈利模式、风险控制、政府监管带来了很多启示。     

保荐机构从业人员腐败问题思考

证券发行上市保荐制度的设计初衷,是通过对保荐机构、保荐代表人课以勤勉尽责义务,对发行人进行充分的尽职调查,并督导其推荐的发行人或上市公司持续规范运作,以提高上市公司质量、保护投资者利益。乱象与罪然而,2010年5月26日,国信证券一则内部通报使券商投资银行保荐业务的公信力阴霾翳空。这则被披露的内部通报,在媒体的进一步调查下显     

强制公开的义务主体与责任主体研究

强制公开原则是证券法律制度中的一项重要原则.强制公开是义务主体向不特定投资者承担的一项法定义务,它要求义务主体必须依法定的形式和内容履行义务;强制公开义务主体是指依据证券法律规定,有义务以自己的名义公开发布相关信息,并对此信息公开行为承担法律责任的主体,主要包括有价证券的发行人、特定情形下的投资者、公司并购中的收购人;强制公开的责任主体,是指根据证券法律法规的规定,因违反强制公开法律制度所应承担民事责任的主体,主要包括发行人、发行人的内部管理人员等直接责任人、保荐人、出具专家意见的证券服务机构、证券商、一定情形下的投资者.     

试论证券侵权及其民事救济制度的完善

一、证券侵权行为的种类及其特征 证券侵权行为是指在证券活动中当事人违反法定义务,侵害他人财产权益而应承担民事法律责任后果的行为。证券侵权行为具有一般侵权行为的共性,即证券侵权行为是违反证券法律规定的义务而非违反当事人的协议的行为;证券侵权行为是基于过错或法律特别规定而应承担民事责任的民事行为;证券侵权行为应对受害人承担责任。就一般而言,其承担责任的范围与违法行为造成的损害相适应。在我国《证券法》主要规定的侵权行为有:     

证券服务机构IPO监督机制研究

证券服务机构在IPO过程中承担核查、验证、审核义务,客观、公正的证券服务机构对于公司证券市场价值准确定位、公司治理结构优化以及风险防控的作用不可小觑。但是通过实证样本分析发现,目前我国证券市场服务机构违法违规问题频出。一方面原因在于外部市场因素的影响,另一方面则受法律与制度规定中证券服务机构角色错位的影响,最终导致其应然价值的迷失。在全面推进IPO注册制改革的新形势下,证券服务机构需从理论与实践中重塑"委托—代理"关系,建立诚信系统、完善诉讼机制,创建证券服务机构增强自我约束的多元路径。     

Fiduciary Duty under the Microscope: Stewardship and the Spectrum of Pension Fund Engagement

UK pension fund trustees’ interpretations of their fiduciary duties may shape pension fund approaches to corporate stewardship and engagement envisioned by the UK Stewardship Code. Data from interviews with pension fund trustees, executives, investment intermediaries and pensions experts reveals interpretive pluralism of the concept of fiduciary duty in the area of pension funds. This article develops a model identifying the spectrum of pension fund engagement, linking interpretations of fiduciary duty to intensity and methods of engagement in practice. The findings help disambiguate the concept of ‘Fiduciary Duty’, highlighting the practical challenges of Stewardship Code application. These insights are relevant to the ongoing revisions of the Stewardship Code and policy clarifications of the nature of fiduciary duty by the UK Financial Conduct Authority. The paper encourages trustees, regulators and others to consider what role pension fund trustees should have in stewardship, which may not be directly relevant to their fiduciary duties as trustees.     

In Search of the Nature and Function of Fiduciary Loyalty: Some Observations on Conaglen's Analysis

Fiduciary law is in a state of flux. We know that the core obligationof a fiduciary is an obligation of loyalty, but we are lesssure what ‘fiduciary loyalty’ encompasses. We knowa fiduciary has duties not to profit or put himself in positionsof conflict, but how these duties interact with other non-fiduciaryduties (whether tortious or contractual or otherwise) is moredifficult to discern. Against this background, Conaglen hasmade a recent contribution to our understanding of the fiduciarydoctrine. He suggests that fiduciary loyalty offers a subsidiaryand prophylactic form of protection for non-fiduciary duties.This article considers his analysis, and argues that it is notsupported by case law and creates a number of inexplicable implicationsfor the fiduciary doctrine. In view of these difficulties, Conaglen'sanalysis should be rejected.     

信义义务下的美国小股东保护制度及其借鉴

由于封闭公司的异质性，多数决原则、集中控制、商业判断规则等传统的公司规范不适宜于封闭公司。为此，美国制定法和判例法不断修正和调整信义义务规范，通过宽泛地适用信义义务规则，课以公司控制者更严格的信义义务要求和标准，加重其信义义务责任，甚至类比适用合伙原则，给予小股东，特别是小型封闭公司小股东充分、有效的保护和救济，值得我们借鉴。     

Fiduciary disclosure of medical mistakes: the duty to promptly notify patients of adverse health care events

Fiduciary obligations are imposed by the common law to ensure that a person occupying a societal role with a high potential for the manipulation of vulnerable persons exercises utmost good faith. Australian law has recognised that the doctor-patient relationship, while not wholly fiduciary, has fiduciary aspects. Amongst such duties are those prohibiting sexual or financial abuse of patients or disclosure without express authority of confidential information. One important consequence of attaching such fiduciary duties to the doctor-patient relationship is that the onus of proof falls not upon the vulnerable party (the patient), but upon the doctor (to disprove the allegation). Another is that consent cannot be pleaded as an absolute defence. In this article the authors advocate that the law should now accept that the fiduciary obligations of the doctor-patient relationship extend to creating a legal duty that any adverse health care event be promptly reported to the patient involved. The reasons for creating such a presumption, as well as its elements and exceptions, are explained.     

公司反收购与董事受信义务研究

本文论述了美国公司反收购的概念与形式;董事受信义务与反收购的价值判断;公司反收购司法之原则,董事受信义务在反收购规制中的作用。     

The Modernization of Trustee's Fiduciary Duties in the Chinese Trust Law: A Perspective from the Uniform Trust Code in the United States

Trust is the greatest and most distinctive achievement of English law, grown and developed over the passage of time, to meet new demands towards providing new solutions to problems, resulting in its widespread and inventive use worldwide. Although the trust system was introduced by the enactment of a specialist Trust Law of the People’s Republic of China in 2001, there is no significant growth in the use of the trust system in civic life. The personal fiduciary relationship between the settlor and trustee is the foundation of a trust. The trustee has an affirmative equitable duty to act solely in the interest of the beneficiaries. Whether people can rely on the trust system and use it universally is highly dependent on a trustee’s fiduciary duty. In the United States, thirty-four states and the District of Columbia have adopted some substantive provisions of the very valuable Uniform Trust Code (UTC). To promote the development and appropriate application of Chinese Trust Law, this article examines the differences between trustee obligations under the American UTC and Chinese Trust Law, and then proposes the amendment suggestion for Chinese Trust Law. This article consists of five parts. In addition to the Introduction, Part I of this article overviews the provisions of a trustee’s fiduciary duties in Chinese Trust Law. Part II discusses and compares the differences and similarities on trustee’s fiduciary duties in Chinese Trust Law and the UTC. Part III explores the comparative consideration of a trustee’s fiduciary duties, and provides the proposals for legal reform. Finally, this article brings forward a brief conclusion.     

The fiduciary duties of healthcare directors in the "zone of insolvency"

Directors of healthcare organizations normally owe fiduciary duties to their shareholders or, in the case of nonprofits, to the charitable mission of the organization. As an organization descends to bankruptcy, however, the board's duties may shift. At some point, the board may be imposed with different and often conflicting obligations to the corporate enterprise as a whole, with a primary criterion being the interests of creditors. In this article, the authors analyze the murky areas of the Zone and give guidance as to when the board's duty may shift-and as to how directors should proceed both in determining their duties and in working to fulfill them.     

我国银行行政接管的法律诠释与制度完善

银行的业务模式具有天然的脆弱性和不稳定性。当一家银行发生严重危机时,考虑到银行服务的广泛性及特殊性,银行监管机构通常会对其实行行政接管,采取各项救助手段使其恢复正常经营,避免其走向行政关闭或司法破产的末路。目前,我国银行行政接管法律制度对于接管条件、救助手段、接管程序、接管权力等方面的规定均存在不足。结合我国银行业发展的现状,建议出台针对银行行政接管的专门规章,在银行行政接管的实施过程中,各政府部门应协调同步,司法部门应予以必要协助。     

Pegram v. Herdrich: On peritonitis, preemption, and the elusive goal of managed care accountability

Managed care presents the paradox of organizations having real power over people's lives without there being clear or consistent means of ensuring accountability. In Pegram v. Herdrich, the United States Supreme Court struggled with whether "fiduciary duties" under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) could be used to counterbalance the incentives that HMOs have to deny necessary care. Given press coverage of the case, however, it was easy to get the impression that the managed care industry itself was on trial in Pegram. This report examines the political and legal forces underlying the dispute and analyzes the Supreme Court's unanimous rejection of the notion of federally imposed duties for HMOs. In the absence of ERISA fiduciary obligations, attention must now shift to developments in state tort law, the scope of federal ERISA preemption, and the prospect of legislative reform. The report concludes with an exploration of how the elusive goal of managed care accountability might be pursued in the wake of Pegram.