Research On The Civil Liability Of Financial Institutions For Violating The Suitability Obligation

In recent years,the concept of propriety obligation of financial institutions has been used significantly in Chinese judicial adjudication.However,due to the lack of research in the academic field and the existence of related laws and regulations in different fields,a complete legal system has not yet been formed.Therefore,when it comes to cases involving civil liability of financial institutions in judicial adjudication,The same case is often decided differently.Financial institutions include a wide range of contents,so the author only takes the civil liability of commercial banks involved in typical cases as the main research object of this paper.By sorting out the judicial views in relevant cases,the author analyzes the court’s judgment thinking,and further grasses the specific identification standards of civil liability in judicial review.The infringement liability mainly lies in "restricting the rights of the seller’s institution or increasing the obligations of the seller’s institution".When the commercial bank violates the appropriate obligations stipulated by laws and regulations,it is the statutory obligation,which constitutes the tort liability.The liability for breach of contract emphasizes the faithful performance of the risk presentation obligation.If the investor’s risk tolerance level is low,but the investor voluntarily asks to buy high-risk products,and the seller does not prompt and induce the seller to buy,the liability for breach of contract shall be constituted.The liability for contracting negligence exists before the conclusion of the contract,that is,the seller violates the obligations of the prior contract,and the civil liability for violating the obligations of the prior contract is the liability for contracting negligence.The judicial organs should take substantive review as the center,combine formal review,and make comprehensive consideration of the causal relationship between the promotion behavior of commercial banks and the loss of investors,so as to further determine the compensation that commercial banks should bear,that is,when commercial banks violate the suitability obligation,they should compensate investors for the principal and interest,which can be calculated using the quoted interest rate in the loan market.The main structure of this paper is divided into three parts: the first part is the focus of the three typical cases as the main content of the research,the author through the court’s judgment basis and hearing ideas,summed up three common,can reflect the current judicial practice of the main focus of the dilemma.The second part is the author’s summary of the focus issues and legal analysis.As the core content of this paper,this section mainly includes the identification of the nature of commercial banks’ violation of the obligation of propriety,the assumption of the nature of civil liability,and the definition of the scope of civil compensation.The third part aims at the dilemma that commercial banks need to bear civil legal liability after judging that they violate the propriety obligation in the current judicial trial.The author will put forward specific suggestions to solve the dilemma from multiple perspectives based on the enlightenment obtained from the case analysis.This paper hopes to study and analyze the controversial contents such as the nature of civil liability undertaken by commercial banks for their suitability obligations,put forward corresponding solutions,and provide referable reasoning standards for judicial adjudication.Solve the current judicial practice of commercial banks to perform the appropriate obligations of the nature of the identification of the nature of civil liability is not uniform,civil compensation scope is not clear and other difficulties,better safeguard the rights and interests of contract commercial banks and investors in the financial market.