操纵市场民事索赔中因果关系推定的法理与适用  

Jurisprudence and Application of the Presumption of Causation in Tort Liability for Market Manipulation

作　　者：刘东辉 Liu Donghui

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学民商经济法学院

出　　处：《财经法学》2023年第5期67-83,共17页Law and Economy

基　　金：中国政法大学青年教师学术创新团队支持计划(20CXTD08)资助。

摘　　要：操纵市场具有不同于虚假陈述的股价影响机理。以理性投资者及完全套利为前提的有效市场假说否定操纵行为与股价影响之间的关联,故欺诈市场理论无法证成操纵案件的因果关系推定,而且会产生“保护过度”和“保护不足”的适用困境。行为金融学表明,证券市场存在非理性投资者的系统性认知偏差和套利机制的失灵,操纵行为更可能干扰普通投资者的决策,从而影响股价。在受规制的证券市场,操纵案件的因果关系推定同样可以适用间接信赖的法理:投资者因合理信赖证券价格的真实性而交易,而操纵行为影响了证券价格。前者应由法律推定,而后者在操纵案件中具有不确定性,需由投资者举证证明。因操纵行为一般不影响公司内在价值,专业投资者的理性决策独立于操纵行为,原则上不适用因果关系推定。Market manipulation has a different mechanism of stock price impact from misrepresentation.The efficient market hypothesis premised on rational investors and complete arbitrage denies the link between manipulation and stock price impact,so the fraud on the market theory cannot prove the presumption of causality in manipulation cases,and it will produce dilemma of“overprotection”and“under-protection”.Behavioral finance suggests that there are systematic cognitive biases of irrational investors and the failure of arbitrage mechanism in the securities market,and manipulation is more likely to interfere with the decision-making of ordinary investors,thus affecting the stock price.In regulated securities markets,the presumption of causation in manipulation cases can also apply the jurisprudence of indirect reliance:investors trade in reasonable reliance on the truth of the price of a security;manipulation affects the price of the security.The former should be presumed by law,while the latter is uncertain in manipulation cases and needs to be proved by investors.Because manipulation generally does not affect the intrinsic value of a company,rational decision-making by professional investors is independent of manipulation,and the presumption of causation does not apply in principle.

关 键 词：操纵市场 欺诈市场理论 有效市场假说 间接信赖 行为金融学 

分 类 号：D922.287[政治法律—经济法学]