证券虚假陈述案件中董事民事责任的区分:以过错为核心标准  

Differentiation of Directors’Civil Liability in Securities Misrepresentation Cases:Taking Fault as the Core Criterion

作　　者：武长海 韦洁 

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学民商经济法学院,北京100088

出　　处：《上海金融》2023年第12期69-79,共11页Shanghai Finance

基　　金：教育部哲学社会科学研究后期资助(重大)项目“国际大宗商品现货与期货定价与监管比较研究”(项目批准号:20JHQ009)

摘　　要：过错董事在证券虚假陈述案件中承担民事责任是其就自身行为担责的表现,也是激励其积极履职的现实需求。当前,我国《证券法》第85条是董事在证券虚假陈述案件中担责的主要法律依据,但是该条款秉持“受害人中心主义”的立场,不区分董事在证券虚假陈述案件中的过错形态,一味地强调过错董事承担连带责任,在某些情况下表现出“强者多赔”的逻辑,一定程度上偏离了人们对公平正义理念的追求。为实现过罚相当,应当以董事在证券虚假陈述案件中的过错形态为核心标准,建立差异化的、多层次的责任构造:对故意的董事,设定连带责任规则;对过失的董事,设定比例责任规则;并且以收益为基准,设定一般过失董事的最高责任限额。The assumption of civil liability by directors at fault in cases of securities misrepresentation is a manifestation of holding them accountable for their actions,and also a practical requirement to motivate them to diligently fulfill their duties.Currently,Article 85 of the Securities Law is the primary legal basis for directors’liability in cases of securities misrepresentation in China.However,this provision adopts a“victim-centered”stance,which does not differentiate between the forms of fault in securities misrepresentation cases,indiscriminately emphasizing the joint and several liabilities of directors at fault.In some instances,this approach follows a logic of“the stronger pay more,”deviating to a certain extent from the pursuit of fairness and justice.To achieve a balance between punishment and fault,it is essential to establish a differentiated,multi-level liability structure based on the form of fault in securities misrepresentation cases:joint and several liability rules for intentional directors;proportional liability rules for negligent directors;and setting a maximum liability limit for directors with general negligence,based on benefits.

关 键 词：证券虚假陈述 董事责任 过错形态 连带责任 比例责任 最高责任限额 

分 类 号：D922.287[政治法律—经济法学]