Research On The Judicial Protection Of The Rights And Interests Of Actual Investors

In recent years,judicial norms and practical treatises related to the protection of the rights and interests of actual investors have been emerging.Judging from the draft revision of my country’s company law,the issue of judicial protection of the rights and interests of actual investors is still a hot and difficult issue in theoretical research and practical exploration.The actual investor is born in the process of the development of the market economy,and the protection of its rights and interests is a problem with unique Chinese characteristics.The most representative ways of dealing with this outside the territory are Germany’s absolute trust in appearanceism and the relatively mature trust system in the United States.Although they embody completely different judicial concepts,they are all worthy of our country to learn from.Discussing the judicial protection of the rights and interests of actual investors in my country not only needs to sort out the disputes in the theoretical circle and the legal basis in practice,but also needs to be closely combined with the national conditions of our country.Many courts tend to involve the equity proxy agreement should be invalid,but there are many reasons for the judgment.The problems mainly focus on the single consideration of the judgment of the property rights of the actual investor in my country,the dispute over some of the conditions for the “return” of the actual investor,and the conflict between the protection of the rights and interests of the actual investor and the protection of the rights and interests of third parties.The legal status of the investor is not clear,the judge makes different or even diametrically opposed judgments on disputes over the actual investor based on different understandings,and the actual investor has no awareness of protecting his rights and interests;Based on the strong realistic demand for this legal system in my country’s judicial practice,in order to better protect the rights and interests of actual investors,the following suggestions are put forward from the perspective of judicial protection: First,strengthen the awareness of legal rights protection and legal risk control of actual investors..Advocate actual investors to pay attention to the system and changes of supervision in special fields,and actively provide evidence in the first time when disputes arise.Actual investors can choose to sign a trust contract or an anonymous contract in writing according to their own needs,and take the contract notarization as their own obligation to achieve effectiveness.The purpose of controlling legal risks;second,confirming legal status and defining the scope of legal protection.The actual investor must be clearly included in the legal revision of the "Company Law",and the illegal and anonymous investment behaviors must be excluded from the scope of legal protection.Determine the bottom linear rules of the actual investor system in the company’s articles of association,learn from the separation model of "qualification" and "equity" in the common law system,and classify the actual investor’s equity according to the degree of control to ensure that the actual investor can choose under different models.Different remedies,while taking into account the connection with the "Civil Code" and related judicial interpretations;third,clarify the rules of judicial adjudication to achieve a balance of interests.Determining the facts of a case is the first premise of a judge’s trial.When the legal truth and the objective truth are not unified,the rule of the same judgment in similar cases is used in judicial practice to establish a standardized database of similar cases,and the actual investors’ rights and interests disputes in the case.The factors to be considered in adjudication have been expanded,and the adjudication standards for the “return” of the actual investor are unified.By maintaining the authority of the notary system and adhering to the principle of identifying differences between internal and external,the judge’s discretion is limited to a certain extent,so as to achieve a balance of interests.Purpose.