【摘要】：自2008年全球金融危機(jī)以來,如何加強(qiáng)監(jiān)管,抑制金融市場過度自由化,解決金融市場系統(tǒng)性風(fēng)險從而保護(hù)投資者權(quán)益成為世界各國共同關(guān)注的話題。隨著金融市場國際化進(jìn)程加速,金融創(chuàng)新的層出不窮,混業(yè)經(jīng)營愈加明顯,各金融機(jī)構(gòu)紛紛推出各類金融產(chǎn)品,在金融產(chǎn)品交易的過程中,普通公眾由于信息不對稱等原因往往處于弱勢導(dǎo)致其財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)益屢遭侵害。近年來,“金融消費(fèi)者”作為一個統(tǒng)合概念被廣泛提起,橫跨了銀行、證券、期貨、保險等各領(lǐng)域,從消費(fèi)者保護(hù)的角度對進(jìn)行金融產(chǎn)品交易的普通公眾進(jìn)行統(tǒng)合保護(hù)。 適當(dāng)性原則從證券領(lǐng)域發(fā)展而起,作為一項(xiàng)行業(yè)自律規(guī)范逐漸過渡到法律規(guī)定,通過課加于金融機(jī)構(gòu)一定義務(wù),在制度上體現(xiàn)將適當(dāng)?shù)慕鹑诋a(chǎn)品推介／銷售給適當(dāng)?shù)娜诉@一基本內(nèi)涵,消除金融消費(fèi)者與金融機(jī)構(gòu)之間的實(shí)質(zhì)上的不平等關(guān)系,從而保護(hù)金融消費(fèi)者的權(quán)益。在金融市場較為成熟的國家,將這一制度明確規(guī)定于法律中,從客戶分類、金融機(jī)構(gòu)勸誘行為規(guī)制以及法律責(zé)任等方面做出了詳盡的規(guī)定。適當(dāng)性原則雖然以信義義務(wù)作為其最基本的理論依據(jù),但在大陸法系國家亦有適用的基礎(chǔ),其內(nèi)涵并未超過誠實(shí)信用原則的范圍。 在適當(dāng)性原則的適用中,金融機(jī)構(gòu)作為義務(wù)主體,在進(jìn)行金融產(chǎn)品交易時,需承擔(dān)因違反匹配度要求,風(fēng)險提示等適當(dāng)性義務(wù)而引起的相應(yīng)的民事責(zé)任。結(jié)合我國金融消費(fèi)者保護(hù)現(xiàn)狀,一方面,我國并未對金融消費(fèi)者作明確的法律界定,另一方面目前對于適當(dāng)性原則的規(guī)定亦散落于行政法規(guī)、規(guī)章、交易所規(guī)定及行業(yè)自律規(guī)范中,存在一定的不足,完善適當(dāng)性原則在我國有關(guān)金融法律中的規(guī)定并最終做出制度上的統(tǒng)合設(shè)計(jì),對于保護(hù)金融消費(fèi)者具有現(xiàn)實(shí)意義。
[Abstract]:Since the global financial crisis in 2008, how to strengthen the regulation, restrain the excessive liberalization of financial market, solve the systemic risk of financial market and protect investors' rights and interests has become a topic of common concern all over the world. With the acceleration of the internationalization of the financial market, the endless emergence of financial innovation, the increasingly obvious mixed operation, various financial institutions have launched various types of financial products, in the course of the transaction of financial products, As a result of information asymmetry and other reasons, the general public is often in a weak position, resulting in frequent infringement of their property rights and interests. In recent years, "financial consumer" has been widely proposed as a unified concept, across the banking, securities, futures, insurance and other fields, from the perspective of consumer protection of financial products trading for the general public integrated protection. The principle of appropriateness began with the development of the securities field, and as a self-regulatory norm in the industry gradually transitioned to the provisions of the law, through which certain obligations were added to the financial institutions by means of the curriculum. The system embodies the basic connotation of promoting / selling appropriate financial products to the right people, eliminating the substantial unequal relationship between financial consumers and financial institutions, and thus protecting the rights and interests of financial consumers. In the countries with mature financial market, this system is clearly defined in the law, including the classification of customers, the regulation of inducement behavior of financial institutions and the legal liability, etc. Although the principle of appropriateness takes the duty of credit as its most basic theoretical basis, it also has the basis of application in the countries of the continental law system, and its connotation does not exceed the scope of the principle of good faith. In the application of the principle of appropriateness, the financial institution, as the subject of obligation, should bear the corresponding civil liability due to breach of the appropriateness obligation, such as matching degree requirement, risk indication and so on, in the transaction of financial products. Combined with the current situation of financial consumer protection in China, on the one hand, China has not made a clear legal definition of financial consumers, on the other hand, the current provisions on the principle of appropriateness are scattered in administrative regulations and regulations. There are some deficiencies in the regulation of exchange and industry self-discipline. It is of practical significance to perfect the regulation of appropriateness in the relevant financial laws of our country and finally to make a unified design of the system. It is of practical significance to protect the financial consumers.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海社會科學(xué)院
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D922.28;D923.8

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 何穎;;論金融消費(fèi)者保護(hù)的立法原則[J];法學(xué);2010年02期

2 孫莉;張乾雷;;論《消費(fèi)者權(quán)益保護(hù)法》中消費(fèi)者的含義和范圍[J];公民與法(法學(xué)版);2010年11期

3 王利明;關(guān)于消費(fèi)者的概念[J];中國工商管理研究;2003年03期

4 宋曉燕;;論美國金融消費(fèi)者保護(hù)的聯(lián)邦化及其改革[J];河北法學(xué);2009年11期

5 秦川;;日本金融商品交易相關(guān)法與普通個人投資者的保護(hù)[J];金融法苑;2010年01期

6 于春敏;;金融消費(fèi)者的法律界定[J];上海財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)學(xué)報;2010年04期

7 原凱;;道德規(guī)范的法律進(jìn)化——美國券商推薦的適合性規(guī)則研究[J];商場現(xiàn)代化;2009年10期

8 白婕;;淺析消費(fèi)者概念的法律完善[J];天津職業(yè)院校聯(lián)合學(xué)報;2011年09期

9 王敏;;證券推薦的適合性義務(wù)——從職業(yè)道德到法律責(zé)任[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2010年06期

10 郭丹;;金融消費(fèi)者之法律界定[J];學(xué)術(shù)交流;2010年08期

，

本文編號：2457497