Obligation To Inform On Financial Institutions

As financial institutions of mass marketing reform and residents personal need of their financial assets on hedge and value-added, a wide variety of financial products has come into being. During the financial merchandising process, some disputes has emerged consequently, these disputes mainly represented in the following aspects: financial institutions do not fulfill or completely fulfill the information obligation, or hidden risk warning, exaggerated financial merchandise earning level and so on. However, these situations are mainly due to the disadvantage of purchasers in information collection capacity and their trust on financial merchandise sales. Investors clearly realized that if they cannot completely understand these information, financial consumption necessarily exists risk, its property also will inevitable to be loss, so they can't free disposal their assets; Also, the missing of legislation in protecting financial consumers currently caused the embarrassing status of financial consumers, and their lawful rights and interests cannot get protection in system level, which led their property loss cannot get legal relief,and this will further deepened financial consumers fear psychological on financial merchandise.The information obligation of financial institutions includes the narrowly information obligations targeted in objective information, warning obligations targeted in natural risks and legal risks, proposing obligations including advising and so on. This treatise discussed in the premise of obligations to inform theory, during the financial merchandising process of the bank, according to the bank's sale acts and financial consumers' different investment level, we summarized three species type cases:(1) disputes produced in the process of the bank sale their own financial merchandise; (2) disputes produced in the process of the bank sale by proxy; (3) financial disputes arising in the course of professional investor. We can conclude from three cases above that before the financial institutions selling financial products to investors, they conduct a level of expertise and the risks assessment to find appropriate means of fulfilling informing obligation, (namely " Suitability Rule.").Suitability rule means when financial institutions providing financial services or selling financial products, they should collect and analyze investors'experience, expertise, financial situation, investment objectives, risk tolerance and other relevant information, on this basis sale of suitable financial products to investors. In upholding the principles on the basis of suitability, if financial institutions violate the information obligation, financial consumers'relief approaches that should be taken are:liability, tort liability for damages as well as liability for breach.On the basis of expounding the relationship between financial institutions and financial consumers and defining the conception of financial merchandise, financial merchandise of sales, financial institutions and financial consumers, through studying comparative law in Japan and European,discussing how to recovery the inequality phenomenon between both part from legislation, justice, the fulfillment and relief way of information obligation, eventually recovery traditional civil party meaning autonomy principles, implementation contract principles such as self-responsibility and so on.