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

In 2003,the Supreme People's Court promulgated "Several Provisions on Trial of Civil Compensation Cases Caused by False Statements in the Securities Market",which is the most important provision in the field of securities in China for the civil compensation system caused by false statements.This provision only stipulates the rules of causation of induced false statement,which can not effectively deal with the judicial dilemma caused by the emergence of induced false statement cases in recent years.As a result,the court can only rigidly apply the rules of determination of the former to the trial application of the latter.In view of this,this paper,by sorting out the judgment results of the cases of induced empty false statements in recent years,analyses the deficiencies and shortcomings of the current rules of causation determination of induced empty false statements,and combines the theoretical research of causation determination rules in American and Japanese securities laws,puts forward that the causation of induced empty false statements in China should adopt two-tier causation theory to recognize causation.It can be divided into factual causation and legal causation.In the determination of factual causality,false statements while positive false statements are intentional false statements adopt "direct consequence theory" and negligence adopt "reasonable foresight theory".In addition to the introduction and the conclusion,this paper consists of five parts:The first part is divided into two sections,focusing on sorting out and analyzing the cases of induced false statements in recent years.Section I,the empirical data analysis of luring false statement cases,lists the years,numbers and proportions of luring false statement cases in recent years,as well as the analysis of relevant judgments,summarizes their commonalities and differences.Section 2,taking the logic of causation determined by the court in Rainbow Elaboration Case as an example,analyses and discusses the rules of causation determination in court hearing similar cases of luring false statements.The second part is divided into four sections,focusing on the analysis of the deficiencies and shortcomings of the current rules for the determination of empty false statements in China.The first section points out that in our judicial practice,some cases can not be accurately defined as luring multiple false statements or luring empty false statements.Section 2 pointsout that there is no uniform applicable rules for the determination of causation of induced empty false statements in China,and judges can only conduct trials by means of case determination.Section III points out that the identification of systematic risk in current judicial practice is not accurate enough,leading to the chaos of "different judgments in the same case" in some cases.Section IV points out that the current provisions on the three time nodes of false statement implementation day,disclosure day and baseline day seem extensive.The third part is divided into three sections,focusing on exploring the theoretical basis of causality determination of induced empty false statements.The first section mainly elaborates the connotation of induced empty false statement,and divides it into positive induced empty false statement and negative induced empty false statement.Section 2,from the perspective of comparative law,studies the rules of causation of false statements in American and Japanese securities laws.Section III,through the study of Section II,discusses the Enlightenment of the rules of causation determination of induced empty false statements in China,and puts forward the double-level causation theory.The fourth part is divided into two sections,focusing on discerning and analyzing the pattern of the rules of causation determination of induced empty false statements.The first section,from the perspective of comparative law,studies how to study the causality of false statements in American securities law.The second section discusses the Enlightenment of our country to this problem,negates the "inevitable causation theory" and "equivalent causation theory",and demonstrates that the two-tier causation theory is most suitable for the requirement of the rule of causation determination of induced empty false statements.The fifth part is divided into three sections,focusing on the improvement of the rules of causation determination of induced empty false statements in China.The first section analyses the factual causality of induced empty false statements.In concealed false statements,the causality of facts is determined by the criterion of materiality,while the criterion of materiality is determined by the criterion of "investor decision-making";in misrepresentation or misleading statements involving significant facts,the theory of fraudulent market is used to determine the causality of facts.Section II,the analysis of the legal causality of induced empty false statements.In the induced empty legal causation;in the induced empty false statement of negligent tort,the reasonable foresight theory is adopted to determine the legal causation.Section III,under the rules established in this article,take "Jingbo Company Case" as an example,re-examine the court's decision results,and put forward their own views.