Research On The Causality Of Civil Tort Liability In Manipulating The Market

A reasonable securities market should have a mechanism to properly protect the interests of all parties,and achieve reasonable fairness through reasonable emphasis on protecting the weak.In the infringement of China's securities market,market manipulation not only frequently appears,but even has become a means for capitalists to seize benefits.They undermine market rules and infringe on investors' property rights.Market manipulation is frequently subject to administrative penalties by the China Securities Regulatory Commission,but few investors are compensated for their losses.In such cases,it is extremely difficult for victims to defend their rights,because the characteristics of the securities market make it difficult to determine the consequences of damage.It is also difficult to determine whether there is a causal relationship between the tort and the consequences of damage.The most important reason for this phenomenon is that in the legal practice,this type of infringement is determined to use direct causality,and the unreasonable distribution of burden of proof leads to insufficient evidence,so that the judge cannot reasonably use the evidence to determine that the damage is caused by market manipulation.This article is discussing the important role of causality theory in manipulating civil torts in the securities market.By analyzing the merits and deficiencies of different theories,and analyzing the argument,It is concluded that the theory of presumed causality is most suitable for the determination of liability for such infringements.This article is divided into five chapters:The first chapter discusses the predicament of manipulating market tort liabilityin general.It mainly discusses the absence of causality in the law.Through comparison with administrative liability,it reveals the theory of causality in the current practice of tort liability determination.Rigidity,and further analysis of the rigidity of the current direct causality theory,as long as it is reflected in the unreasonable allocation of burden of proof,the scope of responsibility is difficult to determine,and it is not suitable for complex securities markets.The second chapter introduces different causality theories in our country: direct causality theory,equivalent causality theory,direct causality theory,equivalent causality theory,fact causality and legal causality dichotomy causality theory,responsibility establishment causality and responsibility Scope causality dichotomy causality theory,presumed causality theory.After analyzing the theoretical connotation of different causality theories and the applicable models in the determination of tort liability in the manipulation of the securities market,we conclude that the author supports the presumption that the theory of causality is more suitable to determine the determination of civil tort liability in the securities market.Aiming at the problems that may arise in the application of the theory,the in-depth analysis is made from the perspectives of the rationality of the defendant's main burden of proof in the application of the theory,the possibility of excessive litigation brought by the application of the theory,and the value orientation of the securities law.The rationality of the theory.The third chapter analyzes the specific application of the theory of presumed causality in legal practice,explores the boundaries of the burden of proof of manipulating market actors and investors,and gives specific details on the core issues of "loss calculation" Calculation ideas.Chapter four enumerates other reasons why market actor can refute the establishment of causality,to limit the liability of market actor,to avoid the expansion of its responsibility,leading to unfair consequences.The fifth chapter summarizes the full text.It is presumed that the theory of causality can solve the problems in practice,realize the purpose of protecting small and medium-sized investors,and maintain the equity of the securities market,from the perspective of the burden of proof distribution and practicality.