Research On The Judicial Adjustment Of The Loan Interest Rate Ceiling Of Financial Institutions

For a long time,the adjustment of the upper limit of the loan interest rate of financial institutions has been generally ignored because financial institutions are considered to have been subject to strict supervision.As an important part of the national reform,the deregulation of the upper and lower limit of the loan interest rate of financial institutions and the implementation of market-oriented reform have been adhered to and deepened.With the continuous in-depth integration of Internet technology and the financial field,great changes have taken place in the financial industry.The illusion that financial institutions are “strictly regulated”has been broken by financial chaos time after time.A large number of high interest rate loans of financial institutions have caused many disputes.The judicial judgment results show a variety of directions.The phenomenon of different judgments in the same case and the reasons behind it need urgent attention.The first part outlines the current situation of judicial adjustment of loan interest rate of financial institutions through rules sorting and case demonstration.In terms of rules,the adjustment of the upper limit of loan interest rate of financial institutions by law follows the market-oriented rules.The Supreme People’s court announced that it would abide by the above rules in terms of judicial interpretation,but setting the upper limit of annual interest rate to 24% through judicial documents is ultra vires.The empirical case study found that the judicial disorder of financial loan interest rate is a result of the confusion in the application of rules.The second part analyzes the triple dilemma behind the confusion of rule application from three perspectives: the application of law,the allocation of financial governance power and the choice of interest rate regulation value.The regulatory failure needs judicial protection,but the path of indirectly judging the legitimacy of interest rates through reviewing the effectiveness of contracts under the current legal supply is not operable.With resource advantages,the regulatory authorities lack the upper limit rules for interest rates,and the judiciary wavers between respecting the professionalism of regulation and participating in financial governance.In addition,the dispute between “interest rate agreement” and “interest rate limit” has no unified view in theory.The counter cyclical governance required by the law of cyclical changes in the financial market has cast a time veil over the dispute between “interest rate agreement” and “interest rate limit”.It is difficult for judges to accurately judge the current financial market environment.The third part attempts to find a way out for the judicial adjustment of the loan interest rate of financial institutions in the above difficulties.The judicial adjustment of the financial interest rate ceiling can only be involved through individual cases.It is clear that the unified rule of the financial loan interest rate ceiling is not feasible.The judicial organs’ intervention in the adjustment of the upper limit of financial loan interest rate through individual cases meets the functional requirements of protecting individual rights and interests and assuming the role of reviewer in the allocation of state power in form,and meets the practical needs of governing the current chaos of financial loan interest rate in substance and rationality.The fourth part explores the specific methods of adjusting the loan interest rate of financial institutions,so as to find a way out for judges to judge the legitimacy of interest rate on the path of Judging according to law.The first step is to give priority to the application of relevant specific rules.When the application of specific rules cannot be solved,the system of obvious unfairness of contract can be turned to.Obvious unfairness has the path advantages of full review,relatively unified discretion,flexibility and legal judgment in the judicial adjustment of financial loan interest rates.The Civil Code stipulates that the obvious unfairness shall meet the subjective and objective requirements at the same time,set the judgment benchmark as the reference for the identification of the objective obvious unfairness,introduce the prima facie proof,and urge financial institutions to issue “responsible loans”.