查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 金融機構與內線交易=Financial Institutions and Insider Trading |
---|---|
作 者 | 賴英照; | 書刊名 | 興大法學 |
卷 期 | 1 2007.05[民96.05] |
頁 次 | 頁1-25 |
分類號 | 563.51 |
關鍵詞 | 銀行貸款; 金融機構; 斷頭; 內線交易; 質押股票; Bank loans; Financial institution; Foreclosure of the pledged stocks; Insider trading; Pledged stocks; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 公司向銀行借錢,負責人拿自己的股票做擔保,後來公司發生財務危機,銀行獲悉消息後,在消息公開之前,搶先賣出質押的股票。這種情形是否構成內線交易?法院見解分歧。本文先就證券交易法有關內線交易的規定,做一簡要說明,再就實務相關案例做一討論,最後提出四點結論: 第一,重大消息公開之前出售質押股票,決定賣出股票的債權銀行負責人,及同意出售股票的公司負責人,均應負內線交易之責。 第二,買賣股票的行為,與股票所有權的歸屬,係屬兩事,債權銀行於獲悉內線消息後賣出股票,不能以未擁有股票的所有權而主張免責。 第三,提供質押股票的公司負責人,如同意債權銀行出售股票,不能以「非自發性買賣」而主張免責。 第四,上市公司遇有退票等情事,應即辦理公告;金融機構亦應於消息公開後,始得出售質押股票。為促進資訊流通,並防止負責人以拒絕同意出賣股票,及拒絕辦理公告,阻止債權銀行行使權利,主管機關應採具體措施,強化公開機制。 |
英文摘要 | In a typical bank loan with stocks being pledged as collateral, the bank forecloses the pledged stocks when the borrower runs into financial difficulties, and defaults. If the bank and the borrower fail to disclose to the public the latter's financial woes, does the sale of the pledged stocks constitute insider trading? Who commits the crime? The lending bank, or the corporate borrower, or both? While the foreclosures of the pledged stocks have become a common place in the stock market, the court decisions on the foregoing problems, however, are still divided, and leave open many important questions. Such a lack of clarity has raised concern from financial institutions and listed companies. This article examines the relevant problems arising from the banks' foreclosures of the pledged stocks. Part I identifies the specific problems that remain unresolved. Part II presents the contours of insider trading under the current ROC Securities Exchange Law, and briefly reviews the key elements, including who is the insider? What is inside information? What securities are covered under the regulation? etc. Part III discusses the courts' treatment of insider trading involving foreclosures of stocks. An examination of the four cases at point reveals that both bankers and corporate insiders are likely to be held liable for in sider trading under the current laws. However, the courts split on who is liable, and what makes one liable. While the banker who orders the sale of the pledged stocks is held liable for insider trading in one case, the other bankers in similar situations are acquitted in the remaining three cases. Likewise, the corporate insiders who pledged his/her stocks under similar circumstances are held either guilty or innocent. Part IV offers a solution to the problems identified in Part I . |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。