Look At The Legal Effect Of Liquidity Contracts From The Perspective Of Judicial Adjudication

In order to protect the legal interests of creditors,as well as transaction security,transaction order,and other legal considerations,our country’s laws impose absolute prohibitions on liquidity contracts.However,as the market economy continues to prosper and develop,and legislation has paid more attention to the nature of private rights and autonomy of the meaning,the judgments and doctrines of some countries and regions have begun to recognise and examine the liquidity contract rules,and legislation has absolutely prohibited a major shift in the trend of liquidity contracts.China’s theoretical research community has never stopped criticizing the prohibition of liquidity contracts,and some of the proposals to lift the prohibition of liquidity contracts have been recognized and followed.At present,the “General Principles of Civil Law” has been successfully implemented,and the sub-editing of the Civil Code has also entered a tightly edited process.Starting from the development trend of the theoretical research results and the application of judicial practice in China,the reconstruction and amendment of the liquidity contract should be reflected in the Civil Code.It is only time to lift the liquidity contract.The basic concepts of the liquidity contract are narrowly defined and broadly divided,and general concepts are generally adopted in practice.From the point of view of the legislation,through the comparative study of extraterritorial related legislative cases,the academic community can sum up the views on the liquidity contract into four categories: absolute prohibitionism,relative prohibitionism,default permissionism,and explicit permission.Although China’s legal provisions impose absolute prohibition on liquidity contracts,there are different voices and opinions in academic research for a long time.This issue deserves our deep thinking.This article analyzes the features of the liquidity contract from the four dimensions of relationship,time,results,and effectiveness,especially in light of the original intention of the relevant legislation prohibiting the liquidity contract in China,in order to be able to more fully understand the legislative spirit and substantive connotation of the liquidity contract..This article comprehensively analyzes the relevant theoretical deficiencies of China’s prohibition of liquidity contracts from the perspectives of the autonomy of private law,the nature of real rights,the realization of costs and the protection of interests,and combines the legal application of liquidity contract disputes in judicial practice.The case was filed in the same trial as the trial of different types of trials,in particular judicial practice studies and legal effectiveness evaluations of new types of guarantee contracts that were similar in form and different in meaning to liquidity contracts,such as debt repayments,transfer guarantees,and post-assignment guarantees.Respectively from the perspective of theory and practice to consider the rationality of the prohibition of liquidity contract,and put forward suggestions for reconstructing the liquidity contract.