中美证券纠纷群体诉讼程序比较研究

发布时间：2018-08-24 20:59

【摘要】：美国的证券集团诉讼制度使得大量单独审理不经济的众多小额诉讼请求得以实现，因此，受到了各国法学界的重视。我国目前对于证券群体性纠纷采取单独诉讼、共同诉讼和代表人诉讼这三种诉讼方式，然而代表人诉讼被束之高阁，该种诉讼方式的应有价值没有发挥出来。本文将对我国代表人诉讼制度和美国证券集团诉讼制度进行比较，进而完善我国的代表人诉讼制度，发挥出其应有的价值。之所以选择美国证券集团诉讼制度进行比较是因为我国的代表人诉讼制度是以美国的证券集团诉讼制度为蓝本建立起来的，和美国的证券集团诉讼制度有共同之处，也具有可比性，且美国证券集团诉讼制度比较完善。通过比较，借鉴美国证券集团诉讼制度的有益之处，不断地完善我国证券纠纷群体诉讼制度。本文共分为三大部分，在第一章中，笔者对证券纠纷群体诉讼制度进行了概述，首先分析了证券纠纷群体诉讼的概念，接着从程序角度分析了证券纠纷群体诉讼的特征，并分析了证券纠纷群体诉讼的价值；接下来阐述了选择美国证券集团诉讼制度进行比较的原因，从历史原因和现实原因着手。一方面是因为我国代表人诉讼制度是以美国的证券集团诉讼制度为蓝本建立，具有可比性；另一方面是因为现阶段我国的代表人诉讼制度被束之高阁，，一个很重要的原因是我国的代表人诉讼制度中的规定不够具体，法官的自由裁量权大，该制度应有的功能没有得到发挥，美国的证券集团诉讼制度是目前解决证券群体纠纷最完备的制度，所以通过比较美国的证券集团诉讼制度中的关键性的几个制度，有利于完善我国代表人诉讼制度，进而有利于证券群体纠纷的解决。在第二章中，笔者对中美证券纠纷群体诉讼程序具体规则进行了比较。先是阐述美国的相关制度，再对我国的相关制度进行说明，再在此基础上，对中美两国的相关规定进行比较评价。主要比较了以下几个关键性的规则：受案范围、法院管辖、诉讼代表人、律师及其律师费、证明责任和通知制度。在第三章中，在前面比较的基础上，主要阐述完善我国证券纠纷群体诉讼程序的具体建议。首先是对完善我国证券纠纷群体诉讼程序的必要性进行分析，再阐述我国在借鉴美国证券集团诉讼制度时应该注意的问题。在此基础上，从受案范围、法院管辖、诉讼代表人等六方面对完善我国证券纠纷群体诉讼程序具体规则提出了建设性意见。
[Abstract]:The system of securities class action in the United States makes a large number of small claims which are uneconomical to be tried separately, so they have been attached great importance to by the legal circles of various countries. At present, our country adopts three kinds of litigation methods: individual litigation, joint action and representative action for securities group disputes. However, representative litigation has been shelved, and the due value of this kind of litigation has not been brought into play. This paper compares the representative litigation system of our country with that of the American securities group litigation system, and then consummates the representative litigation system of our country, and gives full play to its due value. The reason for choosing the United States securities class litigation system is to compare it because the representative litigation system of our country is based on the United States' securities class action system, and has something in common with the United States' securities class action system. Also comparable, and the United States Securities Group Litigation system is relatively perfect. By comparison, the author draws lessons from the beneficial points of American securities group litigation system, and continuously consummates the group litigation system of securities disputes in China. This paper is divided into three parts. In the first chapter, the author summarizes the system of group action in securities disputes, firstly analyzes the concept of group action of securities disputes, and then analyzes the characteristics of group litigation of securities disputes from the point of view of procedure. It also analyzes the value of group litigation in securities disputes, and then expounds the reasons for the comparison of the American securities group litigation system, starting with historical and practical reasons. On the one hand, it is because the representative litigation system of our country is based on the securities class litigation system of the United States, which is comparable; on the other hand, it is because the representative litigation system of our country is shelved at this stage. One of the most important reasons is that the provisions in the representative litigation system in our country are not specific enough, the judges have great discretion, and the functions of the system have not been brought into play. The securities group litigation system in the United States is the most complete system for resolving securities group disputes at present. Therefore, by comparing several key systems in the securities group litigation system in the United States, it is beneficial to improve the representative litigation system in our country. Thus, it is beneficial to the settlement of securities group disputes. In the second chapter, the author compares the specific rules of group litigation in securities disputes between China and America. First of all, it expounds the relevant system of the United States, then explains the relevant system of our country, and then, on this basis, carries on the comparative evaluation to the relevant regulations of China and the United States. This paper mainly compares the following key rules: the scope of the case, the jurisdiction of the court, the representative of the lawsuit, the lawyer and his lawyer's fees, the burden of proof and the notice system. In the third chapter, on the basis of the previous comparison, the author mainly expounds the specific suggestions of perfecting the group litigation procedure of securities disputes in China. The first part is to analyze the necessity of perfecting the group litigation procedure of securities disputes in our country, and then to expound the problems that our country should pay attention to when drawing lessons from the securities group litigation system of the United States. On this basis, the author puts forward constructive suggestions on how to perfect the specific rules of litigation procedure of securities disputes in China from six aspects, such as the scope of the case, the jurisdiction of the court, the representative of the lawsuit, and so on.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D925.1;D971.2

【参考文献】