Research On The Causality Of False Statement Disputes In The Bond Market

Starting from the second half of 2018,a series of defaults in my country’s bond market have emerged as a result of several factors,including the impact of macroeconomic conditions and both internal and external environments.This has led to a pattern of concentrated default incidents.At the end of 2022,a total of 251 issuers in my country’s bond market have defaulted,involving a total of 743 defaulted bonds due,with a total default amount of approximately 667.012 billion yuan.Many scandals have been exposed among listed companies,including financial fraud,false annual reports,and the inclusion of misleading information in bond issuance prospectuses.These scandals have contributed to the trend of concentrated default incidents in the bond market,coupled with the false statements and fraudulent issuance of " Wu Yang Bond" and the bond default and false statements of "Dalian Machine Tool" And other incidents emerged one after another,and the cases of investors filing civil compensation lawsuits for false statements in bonds increased significantly.The Several Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on the Trial of Civil Compensation Cases Caused by False Statements in the Securities Market promulgated by the Supreme People’s Court of my country in 2022,it uses the stock market as a model to regulate issues related to securities false statement disputes.There are conflicts in the application of the Symposium Minutes on the Trial of Bond Dispute Cases in bond misrepresentation disputes,especially in the determination of the causal relationship of loss transactions.In view of this,this article intends to explore the special determination of causation in bond misrepresentation disputes.The first chapter is the theory and classification of the causal relationship in the false statement disputes in our country’s bond market.The first section,from the perspective of the application of judicial interpretations,discusses the impact of the release of the new False Statement Regulations on the determination of transaction causality in bond market false statement disputes and how the characteristics of bond market false statement disputes are different from those in the stock market.The second section discusses the determination of the causal relationship between the two types of transactions in combination with the old and new Provisions on False Statements,and clearly distinguishes the importance of the two types of causal relationship.The second chapter analyzes the transaction causality in my country’s current bond misrepresentation disputes.The first section is based on the provisions of relevant domestic laws and regulations on the transaction causality in the bond market,supplemented by the attitude towards the determination of transaction causality in judicial practice,and leads to the difficulties and disputes in the second section of determining the transaction causality in bond false statements point.Although the case study is conducted with corporate bonds as the main research object,it is intended to demonstrate that in the current rule system,the legal basis for the determination of transaction causality of corporate credit bonds is unreasonable.The third chapter is to analyze the causality of losses in the disputes over false statements of corporate credit bonds.Apply the same method of argumentation in the second chapter.Due to the causality of loss,it is controversial whether to directly apply the new False Statement Provisions or to refer to the Bond Symposium Minutes.Judicial practice is also difficult to determine how to define the existence of investor losses on the basis of the principle of non-illegal damage compensation.From the perspective of the priority of legal application and the elimination of non-systematic risks with reference to the stock market,a path for future judicial trials is given.The third chapter is to analyze the causality of losses in the disputes over false statements of corporate credit bonds.Apply the same method of argumentation in the second chapter.Due to the causality of loss,it is controversial whether to directly apply the new False Statement Provisions or to refer to the Bond Symposium Minutes.Judicial practice is also difficult to determine how to define the existence of investor losses on the basis of the principle of non-illegal damage compensation.From the perspective of the priority of legal application and the elimination of non-systematic risks with reference to the stock market,a path for future judicial trials is given.The fourth chapter studies how to construct the rule system of causality identification in the bond market false statement dispute.First of all,try to balance the interests of investors,issuers and non-issuers from the current situation where bond default and bond infringement are intertwined,and avoid false statement infringement liability as investors’ insurance in the bond market.Secondly,after clarifying the laws applicable to the inter-bank bond market,a special understanding of causal relationship determination under special transactions in the inter-bank bond market is made.Finally,the introduction of the price impact theory balances the inapplicability of the fraud market theory in the identification of bond transaction causality,laying a theoretical foundation for the construction of a unified standard of legal application in the bond market.