The Perfection Of The Rules For Determining The Causality Of Illusion-based False Statements

The provisions of civil laws and regulations concerning false representations in China's securities laws are mainly the "Several Provisions on Trial of Civil Compensation Cases Triggered by False Statements in the Securities Market" promulgated by the Supreme People's Court of 2003.In this provision,only false positive statements are stipulated,and no provision is made for falsified false statements.Therefore,there is a lack of system for the determination of causality in the trial of civil cases of false declarations.The United States and Japan have different systems for determining the causation of false statements.The United States adopts two layers of causality theory as the scientific causality identification method,which can be absorbed by the causality of false inducement statements in China.The change from the "Securities Exchange Act" in Japan to the "Financial Commodity Exchange Act" shows that the theory of considerable causation in the civil law system does not apply to the determination of causality in false statements.The cause-and-effect relationship between China's emptiness-type misrepresentation and the causal relationship should be based on the two-tier causality theory in the United States.The causality recognition is divided into two steps,factual causation and legal causation.In the factual causation determination,false statements are divided into negative false statements and positive false statements.Negative false statements are predicated by significant criteria.Positive false statements are presumed by the principle of trust presumption.The legal causality divides the subjective mentality of misrepresentation into intentional and negligent.The false statement of intentional mentality adopts the “direct consequence statement” and the negligence adopts the “reasonable predictive statement”.