法學論著
論著名稱: Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards, Inc. v. Berner 472 U.S. 299 (1985)
編著譯者: 何曜琛戴銘昇
出版日期: 2011.12.01
出 版 社: 台灣 一品文化出版社
I S B N: 9789860303803
集叢名稱: 美國聯邦最高法院憲法判決選譯 第 7 輯
頁  數: 5 點閱次數: 1686
下載點數: 20 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 何曜琛
關 鍵 詞: 1934 年證券交易法 Section 10(b)規則 10b-5與有過失或同類罪刑抗辯內線交易消息受領人消息傳遞人
中文摘要: 拉丁法諺“in pari delicto potior est conditio defendentis”(與有過失或同類罪刑抗辯):「在一個具有同樣或共同過失的案子裏…被告的地位….較佳」。此一抗辯是基於兩個前提:第一,法院不應調停不法行為人間的糾紛;第二,否認不法行為人之救濟權是一個有效的嚇阻違法的方式。
私人賠償訴訟只有在基於原告具可責性且有下列情形時,才會被禁止:(1)由其行為所直接造成的結果,原告應負擔至少接近相等的責任時;(2)排除其訴訟不會嚴重的影響證券法的效力及對投資大眾的保護時。
儘管 Section 10(b)和 Rule 10b-5 有廣泛的立法目的,然而在這些情形下,於在消息傳遞人、證券專業人員與消息受領人之間,其可責性之關連仍有重要的區別。本院近來明確指出,消息受領人使用非公開的消息資料並不當然違反 Section 10(b)和 Rule 10b-5,除非消息受領人負有相對應的揭露義務。
消息受領人以內線消息交易,在許多情況構成對個人股東的詐欺,消息傳遞人須就這個不法行為共負責任。但內部人在洩漏這樣的消息時,也違反了對於發行公司之受託人義務。
如果被詐欺的消息受領人被允許提起訴訟,就能夠使公司內部人和證券商所為的不法行為因此接受公眾檢驗及予適當制裁。
英文關鍵詞: Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934Rule 10b-5in pari delicto potior est conditio defendentisin pari delictoinsider tradingtippeetipper
英文摘要: ([T]he Latin, in pari delicto potior est conditio defendentis: “In a case of equal or
mutual fault . . . the position of the [defending] party . . . is the better one.” The defense is grounded on two premises: first, that courts should not lend their good offices to mediating disputes among wrongdoers; and second, that denying judicial relief to an admitted wrongdoer is an effective means of deterring illegality.)
([A] private action for damages in these circumstances may be barred on the grounds of the plaintiff's own culpability only where (1) as a direct result of his own actions, the plaintiff bears at least substantially equal responsibility for the violations he seeks to redress, and (2) preclusion of suit would not significantly interfere with the effective enforcement of the securities laws and protection of the investing public.)
(Notwithstanding the broad reach of § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, there are important
distinctions between the relative culpabilities of tippers, securities professionals, and tippees in these circumstances. The Court has made clear in recent Terms that a tippee's use of material nonpublic information does not violate § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 unless the tippee owes a corresponding duty to disclose the information.)
(A tippee trading on inside information will in many circumstances be guilty of fraud against individual shareholders, a violation for which the tipper shares responsibility. But the insider, in disclosing such information, also frequently breaches fiduciary duties toward the issuer itself.)
([I]f defrauded tippees are permitted to bring suit and to expose illegal practices by corporate insiders and broker-dealers to full public view for appropriate sanctions.)
目  次: 判決要旨
關鍵詞
事實
判決
理由
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
    返回功能列