Research On Civil Liability Of False Statement In Securities Market

Through the classification and analysis of nearly 100 cases since the establishment of the securities market,it is found that,at present,the civil liability of false statements in the securities market is facing many difficulties.Among which the most prominent and urgent problems are focused on three aspects:the subject scope of civil liability for false statements,the identification of causation,especially the identification of causation of induced empty false statements,and the preservation and abolition of procedural prerequisite.These three problems affect and restrict each other,and need to be solved centrally.Firstly,the ambiguity and uniqueness of the subject of civil liability for false statements.This is mainly due to the vagueness of the last definition of Article 7 of the judicial interpretation of "Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on the Trial of False Statements in Civil Compensation Cases Caused by False Statements in the Securities Market".Based on the analysis of the case of "Xiangyuan Culture False Statement" and the court’s judgment,this article holds that the clause should be interpreted more extensively,the scope of liability subject should be further expanded,including the company violating the obligation of information disclosure and the senior managers of directors and supervisors,the legal representative of the company who plays a key role in the act of false statement,and the holding of the issued shares of listed companies to reach the law.Secondary market investors,state functionaries,related personnel with disclosure thresholds are multi-level subjects of responsibility.Secondly,the determination of causation is the key to judge the standard of liability.In judicial practice,there is a widespread ambiguity in judging the causality of induced empty false statements."Shandong Jingbo False Statement Case" and " Yinguangxia False Statement Case" are typical cases of luring empty false statement.By drawing lessons from the advanced experience of the United States,we can identify it from two perspectives:factual causality and legal causality.Finally,on the issue of procedural determination,there has been a long controversy in the academic circles about the preservation or abolition of the procedural prerequisite of investor’s civil compensation lawsuit.With the continuous promotion of the registration system and feedback from the successful experience of the pilot project,it is possible to cancel the procedural prerequisite,which can gradually replace the procedural prerequisite with the registration system.This article focuses on the analysis and identification of the three focus issues in judicial practice,in order to provide a clear trial path for the courts to try relevant cases.