Research On The Judicial Determination Of The Validity Of The Entrusted Financial Guarantee Clause

With the continuous development of the market economy,various entrusted financial services are constantly emerging.While entrusted financial management brings benefits to people,it also brings complicated case disputes.In judicial practice,there are problems such as unclear legal basis and unclear characterization of the validity of the minimum guarantee clause in the entrusted financial management contract.The judicial adjudication agency has no unified understanding of the nature of the contract and the conditions of entry into force in such cases,and also has a judgment on the outcome of the judgment.All are different,which seriously affects the impartiality of justice.In the current financial market,the non-legal term of entrusted financing exists widely.Judging from the existing normative documents,the corresponding concepts exist in financial services such as trusts,private equity funds,and personal wealth management.The determination of the effectiveness of the guarantee clause plays an important role in the entrusted financial management contract,which directly affects the relationship between the principal and the trustee.Benefit distribution and responsibility sharing.Due to the particularity of the minimum guarantee clause in the entrusted financial management contract,it is necessary to analyze the nature and legal attributes of the entrusted financial management contract and its minimum guarantee clause in combination with judicial practice to raise legal issues and promote judicial justice.First,in judicial practice,it is determined that the effectiveness of the entrusted financial management contract and its guaranteed clauses are usually related to the entrusted subject.The thesis is distinguished by the validity of the guaranteed clauses signed by the trustee and the entrusting party of different entities in the entrusted financial management contract.When the guarantee clause is deemed invalid by the court,the validity of the remaining contract is still in dispute.In judicial practice,there are three cases for determining the validity of the remaining entrusted contract:the first case is that the guarantee clause is invalid and the contract is invalid;the second case is that the guarantee clause is invalid,the contract is valid and is processed according to the loan relationship;the third case is The minimum guarantee clause is valid and the contract is valid,and the issue of responsibility for the contractafter the determination of the minimum guarantee clause is discussed.Secondly,the difficulties in determining the validity of entrusted financial management contracts and minimum guarantee clauses are: the judicial practice has insufficient understanding of the entrusted financial management and minimum guarantee clauses,and various departments have different standards for determining the effectiveness of entrusted financial guarantee minimum clauses.Finally,suggestions are put forward to improve the above-mentioned entrusted financial management contract and the judicial recognition rules for the validity of the guaranteed clauses.In view of the inadequate understanding of the entrusted financial management and the guaranteed clauses in judicial practice,it is proposed to correctly understand the entrusted financial management and the guaranteed clauses,correctly understand the particularity of the entrusted financial management contract,and fully consider the particularity of the guaranteed clauses;at the same time,unify the standards for the validity of the guaranteed clauses In order to solve the judicial phenomenon of “same judgments in different cases in the same case” in judicial trial practice,it is necessary to strengthen communication between the regulatory agencies,unify the regulatory rules,and improve judicial review measures to effectively play the leading role of judicial judgments,and protect the legal rights and interests of both parties to the contract.