“蓝天集团诉安信信托委托理财案”评析

发布时间：2018-04-27 01:25

本文选题：委托理财 + 保底条款　；参考：《湖南大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着经济的快速发展、资本市场的不断完善、社会闲散资金的增加，理财观念日益深入人心，委托理财作为新兴的投资方式近年来得到了蓬勃发展。2006年发生的“天津蓝天集团股份有限公司诉安信信托投资股份有限公司案”是委托理财合同纠纷中较为典型的一案，在该案中主要涉及到三个争议点：涉案合同的性质、保底条款的效力以及委托理财合同中其他条款的效力。委托理财合同在表象上与借贷合同、委托合同、代理合同、行纪合同及信托合同等具有一定的相似性，但仔细探究可知其存在本质的区别，无论将委托理财合同纳入已有的任何一种制度中都存在着法律制度设计上的缺陷与当事人间利益的失衡。因而，委托理财为一种兼具借贷、委托、代理、行纪和信托性质的“无名合同”。有关委托理财合同中保底条款是否有效也存在一些争议，虽保底条款乃双方意思自治的体现，但因其违背了民法中的公平原则、相关法律的禁止性规定及市场的基本规律，应当认定为无效。那么，当保底条款无效时，，委托理财合同的效力如何？依据我国《合同法》第52条和第56条的规定以及实践中有关认定合同部分无效四要件，应当认定委托理财合同中其他条款依然有效。随着委托理财现象的不断增多，各个法院受理的委托理财合同纠纷案件也越来越多，然而，由于法律上的空白，再加上由于此类案件复杂、涉案金额较大、对资本市场影响较大，最高人民法院针对该问题的司法解释至今也未出台，这些都加剧了同案不同判现象的产生。因而，从司法与立法的角度对委托理财活动进行完善也就尤为必要。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of the economy, the continuous improvement of the capital market and the increase of social idle funds, the concept of financial management has become increasingly popular. The case of Tianjin Blue Sky Group Co., Ltd. v. Anxin Trust and Investment Co., Ltd., which occurred in 2006, is a typical case in the dispute of entrusting financial management contract. In this case, there are three main points of dispute: the nature of the contract involved, the validity of the guarantee clause and the validity of other clauses in the entrusted financial management contract. The entrustment financing contract has some similarities with the loan contract, the entrustment contract, the agency contract, the commission contract and the trust contract, etc. There are defects in the design of the legal system and the imbalance between the interests of the parties. Thus, entrusted financing is a nameless contract with the nature of borrowing, entrustment, agency, execution and trust. There are also some disputes about the validity of the guarantee clause in the entrusted financial management contract. Although the bottom guarantee clause is the embodiment of the autonomy of the will of both parties, it violates the principle of fairness in the civil law, the prohibition of relevant laws and the basic laws of the market. Shall be deemed invalid. So, when the guarantee clause is invalid, how effective is the entrusted financial management contract? According to the provisions of Article 52 and Article 56 of the contract Law of our country and the four elements of confirming the invalidity of the contract in practice, the other clauses in the entrustment financing contract should be recognized as still valid. With the increasing phenomenon of entrusted financing, more and more disputes about entrusting financial management contract have been accepted by various courts. However, due to the blank in law and the complexity of such cases, the amount involved is relatively large. It has a great influence on the capital market, and the judicial interpretation of this problem by the Supreme people's Court has not been issued so far, which has aggravated the phenomenon of different judgments in the same case. Therefore, from the angle of judicature and legislation, it is particularly necessary to perfect the entrusted financing activities.
【学位授予单位】：湖南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】