Evaluation Of Loss In Securities False Statement Case

False statement is very common in securities market of each country and often causes heavy loss to investors, which is no exception in our country. Recently, some investors have brought litigation to ask to protect legitimate right because of false statement in securities market, but they can seldom got compensation because of restriction of various elements, on one hand, it is a difficult international problem to evaluate loss of investors in false statement in securities false statement case, on the other hand, it is a legislation deficiency about compensation on securities false statement.The implementation of some prescriptions made by the Supreme Court on hearing civil compensation case of securities market induced by false statement (hereinafter as prescription) from February 1st,2003 has provided judicial basis for evaluation of loss in securities false statement case. While there are many problems in judicial practice. This paper explores the theoretical and practical problems on evaluation of loss in securities false statement cases based on specific cases, makes jurisprudence comments on evaluation of investors in securities false statement cases and provides some ideas and suggestions on improvement of compensation system of securities false statement.This paper is divided into six chapters.Chapter One puts forward some questions. The title of the paper has been induced by the introduction of the Yinguangxia Litigation Case and the difficult points in false statement cases and current judicial practice has been briefly introduced.Chapter Two mainly discusses the theoretical premise of evaluation of loss in securities false statement cases. This paper insists that the loss of investors in false statement cases should be evaluated according to the principles of tort law and the compensation system of securities damage of our country should adhere to the principle of compensation.Chapter Three analysis false statement elements and market risk elements of loss. It firstly introduces the prescriptions on the two elements in American legislation and our country's legislation, and then it elaborates the different choices of the two elements based on specific cases. Finally, it expounds the road line our country should adhere to.Chapter Four introduces the calculation methods of evaluation of loss in every county's false statement cases. It introduces the calculation methods in security law of America, Japan and our country. Chapter Five makes jurisprudence comments on evaluation of loss of false statement in prescriptions. It mainly make comments on compensation scope, basis day and average price.Chapter Six provides some suggestions on improvement of our country's compensation system of false statement and evaluation of loss.