Research On Legal Relationship Of The Asset Management

In the process of social development,different product categories of asset management products have spontaneously emerged,but their legal features cannot fully apply to the statutory law system of the traditional civil law system.Therefore,the legal relationship of asset management products cannot be properly embedded into a legal system.Determine,as appropriate,but a legal relationship of pipe products are often not only decides the information products are the essence of the rights and obligations of both sides equal,so the government driving type of financial markets in China,the improper legal relationships tend to be because the father loves the type of regulation and the stability of the crisis information technology products,and stability is a mature endowment pipe market information and one of the most important features of products.With the promulgation of the guidance on regulating the asset management business of financial institutions,the internal legal relationship of asset management products has once again become a hot issue.There are some difficulties in dealing with the internal legal relationship of asset management in China.The essential reason is the basic positioning of the legal relationship.The external manifestation is that the application of the law cannot fairly distribute the rights and obligations of both parties.Observation of asset management products in China for nearly three years of judicial practice,the court often used predominantly principal-agent contract make adjustments based on traditional civil law path corresponding to the case,and single principal-agent relationship is not only unable to cover the whole information technology products,the essence of the right to equality,cannot guarantee investors and even the traditional contract theory brings the risk of moral hazard.Therefore,the return of the legal relationship of asset management products to the theoretical path of trust law has become a hot issue in the legal field recently,and taking the trust relationship as the law of the entire asset management product industry has become the proposition of some scholars.However,the trust law is not only a narrow department law in China,but also an asset management product type or organizational form in the world.From the perspective of comparative law,the trust relationship is not the basic relationship of asset management products.In addition,the trust relationship is still unable to solve the problems existing under the principal-agent contract,and the cost of law revision is too high.In fact,there is some resistance to taking the trust law as the basic legal relationship of asset management products.Through typed analysis of the information technology products,China's modern financial information products because of China's special financial background,in the present a complex structure,the management characteristics of long chain,all kinds of structured products and channel business between the various financial institutions and legal relationship between investors and financial institutions is not a single legal relationship,and the legal relations of the traditional single inevitably lack of brokerage,custody,sales and other supporting special adjustment of the business.It seems to be a feasible alternative way to pursue the intermediate legal relationship of equality of substantive rights and obligations.It does not force the asset management products into the current legal system,but mostly pursues the unity of the legal relationship of asset management products,and emphasizes the rights and obligations between the related subjects of asset management business,namely fiduciary duty.Through carding the current laws and regulations,there are a large number must conform to the statutes in conceptual terms of western faith obligations,and information technology in the regulation of our country there are a large number of obligations such as adequacy rules,information disclosure rules,the rules of prudent investor rule of faith specific standards,the problem is how to provide regulatory rules passage into the system of rights and obligations in our country.If we look at the United States,the judicial history of the United States has also experienced the transition from excluding "regulatory rules" into the judicial system to taking regulatory rules as the standard to test the existing legal facts,which provides us with a good reference value.Regulatory rules can also become a standard to test the duty of care in China.