委托理财合同保底条款效力问题再思考  

Rethinking on Minimum Guarantee Clause in Entrusted Wealth Management Contracts

作　　者：官欣荣[1] 杨浩云 陈雅慧 GUAN Xinrong;YANG Haoyun;CHEN Yahui

机构地区：[1]华南理工大学法学院,广州510006

出　　处：《北华大学学报（社会科学版）》2024年第4期124-133,155,156,共12页Journal of Beihua University(Social Sciences)

摘　　要：《关于规范金融机构委托理财的指导意见》为解决金融机构受托理财保底条款纠纷提供了指引,但对民间委托理财而言,仍存在适用困境。基于对《全国法院民商事审判工作会议纪要》(法〔2019〕254号)及《中华人民共和国民法典》(以下简称《民法典》)施行前后样本数据比照分析,提出为了更好预防和管控委托理财市场风险,应按金融委托理财与民间委托理财合同区分规制路径,予以委托理财合同有名化立法及司法裁判规则完善。针对金融机构委托理财保底条款应坚持“无效”论,对于民间委托理财合同保底条款效力应作进阶细分,对于以代理理财为业的非金融机构委托理财合同及交易标的数额较大的理财合同,宜类推适用金融机构委托理财保底条款“无效”规则,对于偶尔为之的非金融机构理财合同及自然人所签的交易标的数额较小的理财合同,应尊重其合约自治,支持保底条款“有效”。The Guidelines on Regulating Entrusted Financial Management of Financial Institutions provide guidance for resolving disputes over minimum guarantee clauses for entrusted wealth management by financial institutions,but there are still application difficulties for private entrusted wealth management.Based on the comparative analysis of sample data before and after the implementation of“National Court Civil and Commercial Trial Conference Minutes”(Law[2019]254)and“Civil Code”,it is proposed that regulatory paths should be distinguished between financial entrusted wealth management and private entrusted wealth management contracts in order to better prevent and control the risks in the entrusted wealth management market,and legislation and judicial judgment rules for the naming of entrusted wealth management contracts should be improved.Regarding the minimum guarantee clauses for entrusted wealth management by financial institutions,the“invalidity”theory should be adhered to.The effectiveness of the minimum guarantee clauses in private entrusted wealth management contracts should be further subdivided.For non-financial institution entrusted wealth management contracts,the“invalidity”rule of the minimum guarantee clauses for entrusted wealth management by financial institutions should be applied by analogy.For occasional and small contract signed by natural persons,their contract autonomy should be respected,and the“validity”of the minimum guarantee clauses should be supported.

关 键 词：委托理财合同 保底条款 法律效力 区分规制 

分 类 号：D923.6[政治法律—民商法学]