金融危机以来美国证券自律监管的司法审查研究

发布时间：2018-06-28 15:31

  本文选题：自律监管 + 司法审查　； 参考：《证券市场导报》2017年12期

【摘要】：2007~2008年金融危机以来,美国证券自律监管组织遭遇的诉讼案件明显增多。证券自律监管纠纷主要集中在自律组织未能或不当履行监管职责、纪律处分措施及程序不当、创新业务和收费规则引起的争议、会员的信用管理以及对特定主体的信息公开(披露)等五个方面。总体而言,美国法院在决定是否介入证券交易所的自律监管时,仍然以自律组织享有绝对豁免权以及当事人是否穷尽救济作为考量前提,而在具体的案件审判中则倾向于审慎界定绝对豁免权的适用范围,要求绝对豁免权以及穷尽救济原则的适用应与自律监管密切相关。这些争议及判例为思考我国证券自律监管的优化和完善提供了参考借鉴,特别是在具体的司法政策层面,应当看到美国证券自律监管司法介入政策分别有其法源逻辑、结构逻辑和配套逻辑,在参考借鉴时应当审慎、有序推进。
[Abstract]:Since the financial crisis from 2007 to 2008, the number of litigation cases encountered by securities regulatory organizations in the United States has increased significantly. Disputes over securities self-regulation mainly focus on disputes arising from the failure or improper performance of regulatory duties by self-regulatory organizations, improper disciplinary measures and procedures, innovation of business and charging rules, The credit management of members and the disclosure of information to specific subjects are five aspects. In general, in deciding whether to intervene in the self-regulatory supervision of stock exchanges, American courts still consider whether self-regulatory organizations enjoy absolute immunity and whether the parties have exhausted remedies. However, in the specific case trial, the scope of application of absolute immunity should be carefully defined, which requires that the application of absolute immunity and the principle of exhaustion relief should be closely related to self-regulation and supervision. These disputes and precedents provide a reference for thinking about the optimization and perfection of securities self-regulation in China, especially at the level of specific judicial policy, it should be seen that the judicial intervention policy of securities self-regulation in the United States has its own legal source logic. Structural logic and supporting logic should be carefully and orderly promoted when referring to and using for reference.
【作者单位】： 上海证券交易所资本市场研究所;
【分类号】：D971.2;DD912.28
，

本文编号：2078466