美国联邦证券法中的首要责任和次要责任

发布时间：2018-04-18 03:04

本文选题：证券欺诈 + 首要责任　；参考：《北京外国语大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：本文的目的在于研究美国联邦证券法中证券欺诈责任的界定,主要是首要责任和次要责任两个概念的区分以及各自的发展,希望能够通过探索美国联邦法在此小小领域的发展历程,分析美国联邦证券法立法和适用法律的机制,为中国在证券法立法和证券监管提供一定的参考和借鉴。文章的第一部分主要介绍了美国联邦证券法的法律渊源,特别是关于证券欺诈责任的规定,梳理了首要责任和次要责任的区分来源。文章的第二部分探索了次要责任概念在诞生之后,在联邦法院的境遇,尤其是最高法院判例做出规定明确限制了私人以次要责任起诉证券欺诈之后,下级联邦法院如何解读,投资者和律师如何寻找救济途径一—机制责任的产生,以及联邦最高法院限制了以次要责任为诉由起诉证券之后,美国政府(主要是证监会)以及美国国会如何反应,如何提出相应的监管措施和政策。文章的第三部分讨论了机制责任作为起诉法条规定之外的参与者的新路径在联邦法院审判中的境遇和发展情况,先是不同联邦上诉巡回法院采用不同的适用方法,后是由最高法院判决定——机制责任不存在,除非产生机制责任的行为必然会导致虚假陈述,还讨论了不同法院处理方式背后的法理和政策性考量,得出结论——机制责任得到了严重的限制,实际上主要责任也是在不断的限缩。文章的第四部分则是更多地讨论了过去几十年里对证券市场发展和证券监管来说最为重要的时代背景——安然事件和2008年以来的次贷危机,介绍了在此背景之下,美国国法作为立法权的化身是如何证券欺诈责任和证券监管这个问题上作出的回应,并对比了在此背景之下,美国最高法院在再一次面临证券欺诈的首要责任和次要责任问题时的判决以及其背后的考量。文章的第五部分是回顾了从1934年美国出台《1934年证券交易法案》后到2011年Janus—案判决以来的几十年里,证券欺诈中的首要责任和次要责任两个概念的发展,发现了"发展"无论在英文语境还是中文语境里都并不一定是一个扩大扩张的过程,在本篇论文研究的这个领域是总体上在限缩,但也在逐渐准确的过程。文章主要讨论了在此过程中,美国法的整个大背景和大结构对这个小小概念发展的影响,包括联邦法和州法二元制,三权独立和判例法等美国特点的影响。最后介绍了中国证券法的立法现状以及从美国证券法发展当中可以怎样学习借鉴。最后得出结论,无论是首要责任还是次要责任,都从很大程度上在提出来之后得到严重的限缩,而这一发展趋势的最大影响因素就是最高法院的保守主义,这种保守主义在特殊的美国法体系之下得到了极大程度上的发挥,美国联邦法院,尤其是最高法院——其在证券监管体系中的位置特殊,在过去没有能够配合市场发展和政府监管,而未来可能也不会配合。我国立法进行法律移植时,可能要更多地着眼于自身的发展经验而非美国的经验。
[Abstract]:The purpose of this paper is to study the definition of liability of securities fraud in the U.S. federal securities law, mainly to distinguish between primary and Secondary Liability responsibility two concepts and their development, hoping to explore the development process of the United States federal law in this small area, the mechanism analysis of the U.S. federal securities laws legislation and applicable law, to provide a China reference in the securities law and securities regulation. The first part mainly introduces the legal origin of the U.S. federal securities laws, especially the provisions on the liability of securities fraud, combing the primary responsibility and secondary responsibility to distinguish the source. The second part of the article explores the concept of secondary responsibility after the birth, in federal court the situation, especially the Supreme Court made clear limits to private prosecution by liability of securities fraud, the lower federal courts to interpret How to find investors, lawyers and Remedies - mechanism of responsibility, and the Federal Supreme Court to limit the secondary responsibility for litigation by prosecution securities after the U.S. government (mainly the Commission) and the Congress of the United States how to respond, how to put forward the corresponding regulatory measures and policies. The situation and development situation of the third part of the article discussed the mechanism of responsibility as a new path outside the law to prosecute the provisions of the participants in the federal court in the trial, the first is the different Federal Circuit Court of appeals by use of different methods, after the Supreme Court decision is sentenced responsibility mechanism does not exist, unless the mechanism of responsibility behavior will inevitably lead to false statements, legal and policy considerations behind different court handling is also discussed, the conclusion: the mechanism of responsibility has been seriously restricted, the main responsibility is not actually broken the limit Shrinkage. The fourth part of the article is discussed more in the past few decades the development of the securities market and securities regulation is the most important background of Enron and the subprime crisis since 2008, introduced under this background, the United States law incarnation as a legislative power is how to make the securities fraud and securities regulatory responsibility for this problem the response was compared in this context, the United States Supreme Court ruling in the face again the primary responsibility and secondary responsibility of securities fraud and the considerations behind it. The fifth part of the article is reviewed from 1934 the United States issued <1934 Securities Exchange Act of 2011 Janus - > after ruling since decades in the development of securities fraud in the primary and Secondary Liability responsibility two concepts, found the "development" in the context of English or Chinese context are not a Is an expansion process in the field of the research of this thesis is on the whole in the limit, but also in the process of gradually accurate. This paper mainly discusses in this process, influence the development background and structure of American Law on this little concept, including federal law and state law two yuan, three independent right and case law etc. the characteristics of the United States. Finally, introduces the current legislation of securities law and China from the development of American securities law can learn how to learn. And finally come to the conclusion that it is the primary responsibility or secondary responsibility, from a large extent in the proposed after serious limit however, the factors that affect the development trend of the Supreme Court is conservative, this conservatism has been largely play under American law system, the federal courts, especially the Supreme court- The securities regulatory system in the special position in the past have not been able to cope with the development of the market and government regulation, but the future may not cooperate. The legislation of legal transplantation, may be more focused on their own development experience rather than the experience of the United States.

【学位授予单位】：北京外国语大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D971.2;DD912.28

【参考文献】