請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/86957
標題: | 論證券服務機構的受託人義務—— 台灣法與美國法的比較研究 The Fiduciary Duty of Securities Service Providers: Comparing Taiwanese and U.S. Laws |
作者: | 洪振騰 Jhen-Teng Hung |
指導教授: | 楊岳平 Yueh-Ping Yang |
關鍵字: | 證券商,證券投資顧問,證券投資信託,證券投資信託及顧問法,金融消費者保護法,忠實義務,善良管理人注意義務,受託人責任, Securities Broker,Securities Investment Advisor,Securities Investment Trust,Financial Consumer Protection Act,Duty of Loyalty,Duty of Care,Fiduciary Duty, |
出版年 : | 2023 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 臺灣的證券業務在過去兩年得益於資本市場的蓬勃,而獲得爆炸性的成長,其中包括證券經紀商、證券投資顧問業者與證券投資信託業者(下簡稱「證券服務機構」)也乘著這波成長一路高歌猛進,成為人們關注焦點。本文從證券投資信託及顧問法與金融消費者保護法等規範、判決以及金融消費評議中心決定等出發,結合前揭證券服務機構常見的業務種類及與投資人間的民事法律關係,回顧我國法下現有關於證券服務機構的受託人義務法制。整體而言,我國法下證券服務機構的受託人義務仍存有若干待討論之處,包含金融消費者保護法第7條第3項的法律要件解釋及法律效果、違反受託人義務的民事法律性質定性為何以及其義務內涵仍仍流於空泛等諸多議題。
本文嘗試以美國比較法研究為中心,觀察並彙整美國法對於證券服務機構在提供相類似的證券服務時的因應之道。美國法針對證券服務機構之受託人義務,設計上包含忠實義務與善良管理人之注意義務,前者主要係以利害關係衝突防免作為核心,要求證券服務機構揭露其利害關係與建立內控機制控制其利害關係;後者美國法則多以最佳利益義務為核心,要求證券服務機構為客戶之最佳利益為計算,從而要求業者進行風險控制以及決策係基於合理基礎等。基此比較研究,本文分別以證券服務的特性以及現行法的立法歷程與意旨等為基礎,一方面建議將美國法下的受託人義務核心內涵引進我國法之架構,另一方面結合美國法下的規定或理論,嘗試對於我國法之其他議題提出建議,期待可以使我國證券服務機構之受託人義務趨於完整。 Taiwan's securities businesses have experienced explosive growth in the past two years due to the booming capital market. Securities service providers, including securities brokers, securities investment advisors, and securities investment trusts, have been riding on this growth wave and caught the crowds’ attention. This thesis reviews the current legal regime of the fiduciary duty of securities service providers under the Taiwanese laws, including the Securities Investment Trust and Consulting Act and the Financial Consumer Protection Act, the related court decisions, and the decisions of the Financial Ombudsman Institution, in conjunction with the common business types of securities service providers and the legal relationships between securities service providers and investors. This thesis finds that several issues remain under the current regime, including the unclear meaning and legal effect of Article 7(3) of the Financial Consumer Protection Act, the characterization of the breach of fiduciary duty, and the vague definition of fiduciary duty. This thesis attempts to conduct a comparative study of the U.S. law related to the fiduciary duty of securities service providers. This thesis observes that that the fiduciary duty of securities service providers in the U.S. includes the duty of loyalty and duty of care. The former mainly focuses on preventing the securities services providers’ conflicts of interest and thus requires them to disclose their conflict and incorporate internal control mechanisms to control the conflict. The latter, in contrast, focuses on the best interest obligation that requires securities service providers to act for the best interest of their clients, which thus requires them to conduct risk control and make decisions on a reasonable basis. In light of on the characteristics of Taiwanese securities services providers and the legislative history and intent of the current law, this thesis proposes Taiwanese laws to introduce the core definition of fiduciary duty under the U.S. law. It also proposes Taiwanese laws to refer to the provisions and theories under the U.S. law to tackle other issues under the current regime. It is anticipated that the Taiwanese regulation for securities service providers can become more complete. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/86957 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU202300046 |
全文授權: | 同意授權(限校園內公開) |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-111-1.pdf 授權僅限NTU校內IP使用(校園外請利用VPN校外連線服務) | 2.81 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。