论“沪港通”机制下证券权益的法律适用

发布时间：2018-05-27 07:40

本文选题：沪港通 + 证券争议　；参考：《国际法研究》2016年05期

【摘要】：2007年"港股直通车"推出3个月后即被叫停,之后内地与香港低调孕育了7年,最终于2014年4月10日联合推出了"沪港股票市场交易互联互通机制试点"(本文简称"沪港通")。由于技术条件、市场基础已经比较成熟,"沪港通"已按计划实施。"沪港通"开始运作后必然会带来内港跨境股票权益纠纷,解决纠纷应适用何地法律与两地的证券持有模式息息相关。本文在分析两地证券持有模式以及各种证券持有模式下的法律适用规则的基础上,结合《海牙证券公约》及美国《统一商法典》的做法,试图对"沪港通"机制下内港跨境证券权益法律适用问题的协调提出可行性建议:证券直接持有模式下,证券将适用证券所在地法;证券间接持有模式下,两地都可采纳"权利实现地法原则";将意思自治原则与相关中介所在地原则结合;在比较复杂的现实案例中,当运用上述规则难以找到令人满意的实体法时,我们均可考虑引入"最密切联系原则"来缓解(补充)上述规则之不足。
[Abstract]:Three months after the launch of the "Hong Kong through Train" in 2007, the mainland and Hong Kong kept a low profile for seven years, and finally jointly launched the "Shanghai and Hong Kong Stock Exchange Connectivity pilot Scheme" on April 10, 2014 (this article is referred to as "Stock Connect between Shanghai and Hong Kong". Due to technical conditions, the market base has been relatively mature, the "Stock Connect" has been implemented as planned. " After the operation of the Stock Connect between Shanghai and Hong Kong, it will inevitably bring about cross-boundary equity disputes between Hong Kong and China. Where should the law be applied to resolve the dispute and the mode of holding securities between Hong Kong and Hong Kong will be closely related. Based on the analysis of the two modes of securities holding and the applicable rules of the law under various modes of securities holding, this paper combines the practice of the Hague Securities Convention and the uniform Commercial Code of the United States. This paper tries to put forward some feasible suggestions on the coordination of the legal application of cross-border securities rights and interests under the "Stock Connect" mechanism: under the mode of direct holding of securities, the law of securities location will apply to securities, and the mode of indirect holding of securities will be applied. In both places, the principle of "the realization of rights" can be adopted; the principle of autonomy of will is combined with the principle of the location of the relevant intermediary; in more complex practical cases, when it is difficult to find satisfactory substantive law by applying the above rules, We may consider introducing the principle of closest ties to alleviate (supplement) the deficiencies of the above rules.
【作者单位】：澳门大学法学院;
【分类号】：D922.287

【相似文献】