委托理财合同纠纷实证研究

发布时间：2018-02-26 11:10

本文关键词： 委托合同风险告知信息披露义务保底条款无效　出处：《吉林大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：随着经济全球化、贸易自由化以及信息网络化的市场经济时代逐渐确立,民间财富不断积累,人们已经不满足于简单化、单项化、收益率低下的实体商户投资,越来越多的人会选择高收益的金融投资理财以谋求资本增长。一些投资人畏于金融理财活动的高风险性,选择委任商业银行为主的投资机构代为理财,自此,委托理财活动应运而生。然而,约定保底条款成为常态、受托人恶意亏损等种种问题层出不穷,致使委托理财合同不能正常地发挥积极的市场效应。由此引发的委托理财合同纠纷案件数量不断上涨,成为审判中的一类疑难复杂案件。在审判实践中各地法院的裁判案例对于委托理财合同纠纷问题的解决虽已提供了一些经验,但立法的空缺导致裁判结果无法统一的乱象,急需学者和司法工作者加快补足这一空缺。本文针对这一现状,展开研究工作,采用实证研究的方法对委托理财合同纠纷的裁判情况进行了统一的归纳、整理、分析,对委托理财的重点问题做一专业的判断,文章主要分为四个部分:第一部分:我国委托理财纠纷现状概要。该部分从委托理财合同纠纷案件数据统计出发,概括了委托理财合同纠纷在司法审判中表现出来的特点。并总结性地说明了相关问题的争议焦点主要包括:1、委托理财合同的合同定性问题;2、受托人风险告知义务和信息披露义务应否明确为私法规范中的义务的问题;3、关于委托理财合同中保底条款效力认定的问题。第二部分:委托理财合同的法律属性之争。委托理财合同经常与借款合同发生混同,在这一部分中,通过相关审判案件的例证,不仅说明了混同现象的种类,也细致地分析了委托理财合同与借款合同发生混同的原因。并且提出了关键性的问题,即委托理财合同的法律属性问题。需要注意的是,本文并未吸纳信托说的相关观点,直接认定委托理财合同是一种特殊的委托合同。第三部分:受托人的风险告知义务与信息披露义务边界。因立法空缺导致金融消费者的各项权益经常得不到及时、有效的保护,该部份就受托人的两项重大义务(风险告知义务、信息披露义务)展开讨论,以期通过立法明确受托人相关义务,从而保障金融消费者的财产权益。该处沿用全文实证研究的方法,由风险告知义务与信息披露义务得不到善良履行而导致侵害金融消费者权益的现状入手,明确提出了将受托人的风险告知义务和信息披露义务加入立法的建议。第四部分:保底合同条款的效力认定。在委托理财合同纠纷中,保底条款效力认定问题一直是司法审判中争议最大的问题,因此,本文最终就这一问题进行了重点讨论。该部分的特点是层级化的讨论,当然也一并采用了实证研究的方法。首先,通过案例引出保底条款的定义和发生率问题。然后,讨论了关于保底条款效力认定的一些不同观点及相应的原因。而后,表明了本文支持保底条款无效且不影响其他合同条款效力的观点,并详细说明了原因。最后,完整地表述了保底条款认定无效后责任承担的问题。
[Abstract]:With the economic globalization, trade liberalization and information network era of market economy gradually established, private wealth accumulation, people are not satisfied with a simple, single, low rate of return on the investment of business entities, more and more people will choose high income financial investment for capital growth. High risk investors fear of financial activities, the choice of investment institutions appointed commercial banks for financing, trust financing activities emerged. Since then, however, the agreed terms of the minimum guarantee has become the norm, the trustee and other malicious losses emerge in an endless stream, resulting in the trustmanagement contract not normal to play a positive market effect. The number of commissioned financing contract dispute cases arising from the rising, become a kind of difficult and complicated cases in the trial. In judicial practice all over the court referee case of commissioned management To solve the problem of property contract dispute has provided some experience, but the legislation vacancy causes judge the results can not be unified chaos, scholars and judicial workers need to speed up the make up for the vacancy. In this situation, the research work, using the methods of empirical research on the referee commissioned financing contract dispute a unified induction, sorting, analysis, do a professional judgment on the key problems of trust management, the article is divided into four parts: the first part: Chinas trustmanagement status summary. This part starts from the statistics of commissioned financing contract dispute case data, summarizes the characteristics of entrust financial contract dispute reflected in judicial adjudication and. Summary description of the focus of controversy related issues including: 1, the contract nature of entrust financial contract; 2, fiduciary risk disclosure and information disclosure obligations Not clear for private law obligation in question; 3, on the trustmanagement contract validity ofminimum guarantee clause identification problems. The second part: the legal attribute for entrusted financial contract. Entrusted financial contract and loan contract occurred often confused. In this part, through the relevant trial examples not only illustrate the types confusion, also carefully analyze the reasons of entrust financial contract and loan contract occurred mix. And put forward the key problem, namely legal attribute of entrust financial contract. Note that this paper does not absorb related perspective trust, direct determination of commissioned financing contract is a special contract third part: risk trustee duty and the obligation of information disclosure boundary. Because the legislative vacancy leads to the rights and interests of financial consumers are often not timely, effective protection of the part The two major duty of the trustee (risk disclosure obligation, the obligation of information disclosure) to discuss, in order to legislate the trustee obligations, in order to protect the property rights and interests of financial consumers. The use of empirical research methods of the thesis, the status of risk disclosure obligations and information disclosure obligations are not good performance due to infringement the financial interests of consumers with, puts forward the risk of trustee's obligation and the obligation of information disclosure to legislative proposals. The fourth part: the validity of insurance contract terms. In the trust management contract disputes, the guarantee clause of cognizance of effectiveness has been controversial in judicial trial the biggest problem, therefore, this article will end this a problem is discussed. The characteristics of the part of the discussion is in order, of course also adopts the empirical research method. First of all, through the case base In terms of the definition and the incidence of problems. Then, discussed about the validity of the guarantee clause of some different views and corresponding reasons. Then, this paper shows that the support guarantee clause is invalid and does not affect the validity of the other terms of the contract, and a detailed description of the reason. Finally, complete representation of the minimum guarantee clause invalid responsibility the problem.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】