【摘要】：我國證券市場的飛速發(fā)展,對國民經(jīng)濟的發(fā)展起到積極的推動作用,但是我國的證券市場與成熟的證券市場相比,基礎仍不牢固,其主要原因是規(guī)范化程度還不夠,市場法制環(huán)境尚不完善,證券市場基礎制度尚未穩(wěn)固,近年來屢發(fā)不止的證券侵權(quán)糾紛就是最好的證明。自2003年最高人民法院頒布相關司法解釋來雖然對虛假陳述侵權(quán)案件有了比較科學詳盡的解決機制,然而其實效性令人堪憂。于是人們越來越關注于發(fā)展且促進多元化糾紛解決的機制,但另辟蹊徑也需找對切入點,針對具有特殊性質(zhì)的虛假陳述所產(chǎn)生的一系列糾紛建立仲裁機制正是基于證券市場最基本的信息披露制度和侵權(quán)責任中最基本的誠實信用原則所提出的,只有由淺至深地深入糾紛解決中才能既符合我國的實情又具有操作性。 本文共分為四章。第一章追本溯源地從最原始的信息披露制度的概念引出上市公司虛假陳述行為的定義,界定虛假陳述及其構(gòu)成要件,指出虛假陳述行為與其他證券欺詐行為存在的差異。同時通過對上市公司虛假陳述糾紛的典型案例的討論,指出此類糾紛具有一系列不同于一般證券爭議的特點,分別有所涉及的財產(chǎn)利益重大,內(nèi)含很強的專業(yè)性,往往具有群體性,糾紛事實爭議與解決過程復雜。 第二章則對各種解決機制,主要包括訴訟機制和仲裁機制進行比較分析,擺出解決機制的現(xiàn)狀及問題,作為新生糾紛,傳統(tǒng)訴訟模式措手不及,難以全然接納,仲裁機制尚未被重視,繼而成為與訴訟互補的糾紛解決機制。 第三章介紹此類糾紛的仲裁制度的概念、特征及優(yōu)越性,探討仲裁制度建立的可行性和必要性,引出針對此類糾紛所建立的仲裁制度的特殊性,進一步說明建立和完善該類糾紛的仲裁制度的理念意義和實踐意義。 第四章主要是對于完善我國虛假陳述糾紛仲裁制度的思考和建議,借鑒證券仲裁制度發(fā)達的美國的先進經(jīng)驗,從宏觀的制度性建設和微觀的仲裁規(guī)則制定兩個方面分別嘗試在結(jié)合中國證券市場的大背景下提出可操作性較強的虛假陳述仲裁制度。
[Abstract]:The rapid development of the securities market in our country has played a positive role in promoting the development of the national economy. However, compared with the mature securities market, the basis of the securities market in our country is still not solid, the main reason is that the standardization degree is not enough. The legal environment of the market is not perfect, the basic system of the securities market is not yet firm, and the repeated securities tort disputes are the best proof in recent years. Since 2003, the Supreme people's Court has promulgated relevant judicial explanations to solve the infringement cases of false statements in a more scientific and detailed way, but its effectiveness is worrying. As a result, people are increasingly concerned with the development and promotion of diversified dispute resolution mechanisms, but they also need to find the right entry point for alternative approaches. The establishment of arbitration mechanism for a series of disputes arising from false statements of special nature is based on the most basic information disclosure system of the securities market and the most basic principle of good faith in tort liability. Only from shallow to deep in the dispute settlement can accord with the reality of our country and have the operation. This paper is divided into four chapters. The first chapter introduces the definition of false statement behavior of listed company from the most primitive concept of information disclosure system, defines false statement and its constituent elements, and points out the difference between false statement behavior and other securities fraud. At the same time, through the discussion of typical cases of misrepresentation disputes of listed companies, it is pointed out that these disputes have a series of characteristics different from those of general securities disputes. Often has the group, the dispute fact dispute and the settlement process is complicated. The second chapter makes a comparative analysis of various settlement mechanisms, including litigation mechanism and arbitration mechanism, and presents the present situation and problems of the settlement mechanism. As a new dispute, the traditional litigation mode is unprepared and difficult to fully accept. Arbitration mechanism has not been attached importance to, and then become complementary to litigation dispute resolution mechanism. The third chapter introduces the concept, characteristics and advantages of the arbitration system of such disputes, discusses the feasibility and necessity of the establishment of the arbitration system, and leads to the particularity of the arbitration system established for such disputes. Further explain the conceptual significance and practical significance of establishing and perfecting the arbitration system of this kind of disputes. The fourth chapter is mainly to perfect our country false statement dispute arbitration system ponder and the suggestion, draws lessons from the securities arbitration system developed America's advanced experience, From two aspects of macro institutional construction and micro arbitration rule making, this paper tries to put forward a more maneuverable arbitration system of false statement under the background of Chinese securities market.
【學位授予單位】：蘭州大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D922.287;D925.7

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 劉定華,張嚴方;對進一步完善虛假陳述民事賠償制度的思考——評《關于審理證券市場因虛假陳述引發(fā)的民事賠償案件的若干規(guī)定》[J];財經(jīng)理論與實踐;2004年04期

2 陳岱松;魏華文;;論中國證券糾紛仲裁法律制度之構(gòu)建[J];財貿(mào)研究;2009年04期

3 韓德宗,陳啟歡;證券欺詐的理論與實證分析[J];當代經(jīng)濟科學;2002年06期

4 張韶華;證券爭議:兩種法律解決途徑的比較分析[J];當代經(jīng)濟科學;2004年01期

5 郭鋒;;證券市場虛假陳述及其民事賠償責任——兼評最高法院關于虛假陳述民事賠償?shù)乃痉ń忉孾J];法學家;2003年02期

6 劉少軍;;論法程序的本質(zhì)與經(jīng)濟法程序[J];法學家;2006年03期

7 王存;從《仲裁法》看我國的證券仲裁制度[J];法學;1996年08期

8 趙琦嫻;證券市場內(nèi)幕交易民事責任制度研究[J];法學;2003年10期

9 張文先;中國證券市場發(fā)展的邏輯與制度選擇[J];特區(qū)經(jīng)濟;2004年11期

10 周成泓;;中國證券仲裁制度略論[J];特區(qū)經(jīng)濟;2005年12期

相關重要報紙文章 前1條

1 沈四寶 王曉川 沈建中;[N];法制日報;2002年

相關博士學位論文 前1條

1 顏曉閩;美國證券法律史研究[D];華東政法大學;2010年

相關碩士學位論文 前3條

1 王秉乾;證券仲裁法律制度研究[D];對外經(jīng)濟貿(mào)易大學;2004年

2 呂霄;多方當事人仲裁問題研究[D];西南政法大學;2006年

3 任志強;證券虛假陳述的替代性糾紛解決方式研究[D];中國政法大學;2008年

，

本文編號：2118939