论文部分内容阅读
本文以英美国家的判例法为基础,分析银行对客户的信托义务的确立和演进,探讨英美银行为避免或控制因信托义务产生的风险所采取的措施。本文共分五部分。第一部分指出信托、信托关系和信托义务在衡平法中具有宽泛的内涵与外延,由于信托、信托关系和信托义务的术语表达被广泛用于代理法、公司法、合伙法甚至银行法等领域,其具体含义视特定的法律关系而定;并分析了英美法中的信托关系的本质及其具体体现。第二部分分析了信托义务的两种形态及其核心要素,指出银行与客户间的信托义务为非传统的或特殊的信托义务,分析了英国法对银行信托义务的界定:银行作为受托人的义务是为受益人谋求最大利益,并将受益人利益置于受托人自身利益之上。银行不得将其自身利益与客户利益相冲突,不得从其为客户谋取利益的地位中获利,应避免客户间的利益冲突,并向客户提供所有相关信息,并不得使用来自客户的信息,从而为其他客户谋利。第三部分探讨了银行信托义务在英美判例法中的演进。英美法院认为,对银行与客户间的非传统的信托义务的判定,是由判例或特定情势下的具体事实,而非法律条文确定的。尽管法院在判定银行是否承担信托义务的案件中,面对的是不同情势中的具体情形,但仍有一些普遍的原则在判例中得以遵循、沿用并不断通过判例得到完善和发展:1.客户对银行有特殊的信任并依赖于该信任关系而做出判断和决策;2.银行知道或应当知道客户充分信任银行并依赖于银行的意见或建议而行事。第四部分简要介绍了英国法近年来关于“推定知道违反信托”原则的重要发展。银行作为推定受托人承担责任,源于两种情形:一是知情协助,指银行帮助受托人违反信托义务或起辅助性作用,另一种是知情受领,指银行接受了被受托人转移的信托财产。第五部分探讨了英美银行为避免或控制因信托义务产生的风险所采取的措施,并从银行信息披露的角度,分析了英美银行在与客户存在信托关系时必须披露相关事实的制度,以及面对信息冲突,银行的风险控制措施。
Based on the case law in Anglo-American countries, this article analyzes the establishment and evolution of banks’ trust obligations to clients and discusses the measures Anglo-American banks take to avoid or control the risks arising from trust obligations. This article is divided into five parts. The first part points out that the trusts, trusts and fiduciary duties have broad connotation and denotation in the equity. Because the terms of trusts, trusts and fiduciary duties are widely used in such fields as agency law, company law, partnership law and even bank law, Its specific meaning depends on the specific legal relationship; and analyzes the essence and specific embodiment of the trust relationship in Anglo-American law. The second part analyzes the two forms of trust obligations and their core elements. It points out that the trust obligations between banks and clients are non-traditional or special trust obligations, and analyzes the definition of bank trust obligations in UK law. Banks as trustee Obligation is to seek the best interests of the beneficiaries, and the interests of the beneficiaries placed above the trustee’s own interests. Banks shall not take their own interests in conflict with the interests of their clients, shall not profit from their position of seeking benefits for their clients, avoid conflicts of interest among their clients, provide all relevant information to customers, and shall not use information from customers Profit for other customers. The third part explores the evolution of bank trust obligations in the Anglo-American case law. The Anglo-American courts held that the determination of non-traditional fiduciary duties between banks and clients was determined by precedents or by specific facts rather than by legal provisions. Although the courts face specific situations in different situations in deciding whether or not a bank bears the obligation of trust, some general principles still follow in the precedents and continue to be perfected and developed through jurisprudence: 1. Customer Have a special trust in the bank and rely on the trust relationship to make judgments and decisions; 2. the bank knows or should know that the client fully trusts the bank and relies on the bank’s advice or advice. The fourth part briefly introduces the important developments of British law in recent years on the principle of “presuming to know breach of trust”. Banks assume the responsibility as presumptive trustees, from two situations: First, informed assistance refers to the bank to help the trustee breach of trust obligations or play a supporting role, and the other is informed, refers to the bank accepted the transfer of the trustee Trust property. In the fifth part, the measures adopted by Anglo-American banks to avoid or control the risks arising from trust obligations are discussed. And from the perspective of bank information disclosure, this article analyzes the system in which Anglo American Bank must disclose related facts when trust relationships exist with customers. Information conflict, bank risk control measures.