Study On The Judicial Review Standards For The Performance Of Investors’ Appropriate Obligations

There is a close relationship between the increasing disputes of investors’ suitability obligation and the ambiguity of legislation.With the continuous development of the financial market,the transaction structure and transaction mode of financial products are increasingly complicated and diversified along with the financial innovation,and the difficulty for investors to understand and understand financial products is increasing day by day,and the disputes between investors and financial institutions about the performance of appropriate obligations are also increasing.However,in the current system of legal norms,there are more and more regulations on how financial institutions perform investors’ suitability obligations,but in fact,the legislation does not clarify the standards of financial institutions’ suitability obligations.Due to the ambiguity of the performance standards of investors’ suitability obligations in legislation,many disputes have been caused in judicial trials.In judicial practice,these disputes are mainly caused by investors’ belief that financial institutions’ performance of appropriate obligations is not in place,and the court will examine whether the performance of financial institutions’ appropriate obligations meets the standards.In the course of the review,the court has produced two criteria for judicial review.One is the standard of formal review,that is,as long as the financial institution’s performance meets the procedural requirements,the court considers that it has fulfilled the obligation of propriety.The other is the substantive examination standard,that is,the court does not take procedural requirements as the examination target,but "penetrative" examination to explore the real risk tolerance of investors,the risk level of products and the appropriate match between them.Although the two judicial review standards coexist,the judicial practice gradually tends to "emphasize form over substance",which is likely to lead to the imbalance of the relationship between financial institutions and investors.Based on this,this paper aims to explore the reasons why the court values "form over substance" when examining the standards for the performance of investors’ suitability obligations.How to establish appropriate judicial review standards for investors’ performance of appropriate obligations? Therefore,this paper mainly through five parts to study the above problems.The first part is the introduction.This paper mainly introduces the formation,research background,research content,research ideas and methods,and research significance of this paper,and makes a literature review around the relevant theories of investors’ suitability obligation,which lays a foundation for the discussion in the following paper.The second part is the legal basis.This paper mainly combs out the legislation of the performance standard of the adequacy obligation of investors,takes four behavioral requirements stipulated in the nine People’s Records as the center,and interprets the existing legal basis.With the current legal norms,it is obvious that the performance standard of the obligation of appropriateness in our country is mainly procedural provisions,the substantive provisions are vague and broad,not operational,this may be one of the reasons for affecting judicial practice "form is more important than substance".The third part is the current judicial review of the performance standards of investors’ suitability obligations.Starting from the four behavioral requirements of the obligation of propriety,this paper sorts out the relevant dispute focus and analyzes the judicial review of the performance standard of the obligation of propriety in judicial adjudication.This article will make an analysis on the cause of the present situation of judicial review that emphasizes form rather than substance through judicial adjudication.The fourth part is about the establishment of the standard of judicial review of "form,main substance and auxiliary substance",including two aspects of reality and theory.The legitimacy of reality mainly analyzes the legitimacy of the establishment of the model from the perspective of investors,judicial organs and financial institutions.The theory is based on four dimensions of honesty and credit principle,financial consumer protection,outcome justice and administrative judicial coordination,aiming to provide reasonable support for the establishment of the judicial review standard of "form,principal,reality and supplement".The fifth part is the suggestion on the establishment of the judicial review standard of "form,main substance and auxiliary substance".The suggestions include the specific conditions,review criteria,review content and supporting mechanism for the judicial review model.Among them,the most important is the content of the judicial review mode.Starting from the four behavioral requirements of the performance of the obligation of propriety,guided by some problems existing in judicial practice,the specific review content of judicial review standards is improved,so as to provide some suggestions for judicial practice.