检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:沈伟[1] 沈平生 Shen Wei;Shen Pingsheng
出 处:《西南金融》2020年第5期3-16,共14页Southwest Finance
基 金:2019年中证中小投资者服务中心课题“体系化构建证券期货纠纷调解与仲裁机制研究”的成果之一。
摘 要:我国新修订的《证券法》于2020年3月1日正式施行。作为资本市场根本法规,《证券法》新增第六章"投资者保护"可谓亮点之一,其中第94条规定"强制调解制度"在诉讼和仲裁之外为投资者提供了新的维权路径,加强对投资者的事后保护。但目前我国证券纠纷调解机制仍有诸多问题,例如法律条文碎片化、调解协议刚性不足、调解衔接机制不完善、调解机构体系混乱、监督机制不力等,这些弊病从根本上严重影响证券纠纷调解机制的制度设计和程序运行。本文拟通过分析英国金融申诉专员制度的成熟经验,为我国证券纠纷调解机制的完善和发展提出优化路径。China’s newly revised "Securities Law" was formally implemented on March 1, 2020. As a fundamental regulation of the capital market, the new Chapter 6 "Investor Protection" of the "Securities Law" can be described as one of the highlights, of which Article 94 stipulates that the "Compulsory Mediation System" provides investors with a new path of rights protection in addition to litigation and arbitration, and strengthens the ex-post protection of investors. However, at present, there are still many problems in China’s securities dispute mediation mechanism,such as fragmentation of legal provisions, insufficient rigidity of mediation agreements, imperfect mediation connection mechanism, confusing mediation institution system, and inadequate supervision mechanism. These issues seriously affect the system design and procedure operation of the securities dispute mediation mechanism. This article intends to propose an optimized path for the improvement and development of China’s securities dispute mediation mechanism by analyzing the mature experience of the British Financial Ombudsman system.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:18.117.185.140