信用评级业的专家责任问题  

Review on Professional Liability of Credit Rating

作　　者：李晓郛 

机构地区：[1]福建省人民检察院,福建福州350013

出　　处：《上海金融学院学报》2014年第3期108-114,共7页Journal of Shanhai Finance University

基　　金：教育部哲学社会科学研究重大攻关项目"国际金融中心法制环境研究"(2011JZD009)的研究成果之一

摘　　要：传统上,美国信用评级机构主张评级报告属于涉及公共利益的意见,援引宪法第一修正案进行抗辩。作为金融征信的重要内容,信用评级业在未来可能引发一系列专家责任案件,而现今中国法律体系对于专家责任的规定不健全。虽然专家责任的法律属性还需要进一步讨论,但是目前更重要的是先处理专家责任。中国法院在处理信用评级引发的案件时,可以借鉴美国的司法判例,以信用评级报告在商事交易中的作用认定专家责任的大小。Credit rating agencies have historically been quite successful at avoiding liability over their ratings by appealing to the US First Amendment’s guarantee of the freedom of speech. As an important part of financial credit, the credit rating industry in the future may lead to a series of professional liability cases, but for the provisions of the current Chinese legal system is not perfect in professional liability. There needs more discussions on legal status of professional liability, but it is more important to deal with the wrong acts. Chinese courts should also learn from the U.S. judicial practice and study financial service agencies in the role of commercial transactions when determining their responsibilities.

关 键 词：专家责任 信用评级 法律属性 美国司法判例 

分 类 号：F830.39[经济管理—金融学]