科创板下的惩罚性赔偿制度研究
Research on the Punitive Damages Awards under the Science and Technology Innovation Board
DOI: 10.12677/OJLS.2020.83044, PDF,  被引量   
作者: 梁煜钊:中国政法大学法学院,北京;虞宗麟*:清华大学法学院,北京
关键词: 科创板惩罚性赔偿制度金融消费者Science and Technology Board Punitive Damages System Financial Consumers
摘要: 随着科创板于2019年正式成立,关于惩罚性赔偿制度如何适用科创板便有了重要意义。笔者从实证法学角度,借鉴一定美国相关法的理论,对在科创板下引入惩罚性赔偿制度进行三个部分的研究。第一部分是探讨惩罚性赔偿制度适用的意义。第二部分是对惩罚性赔偿的主体制度进行探究,包括相关主体的组成,适用性,关系。第三部分是对惩罚性赔偿的数额组成,适用标准进行探究。笔者认为理清受赔偿主体、责任主体、行政机关与社会组织的关系,是完善惩罚性赔偿制度的重要前提,合理平衡惩罚性赔偿数额则是保障实现惩罚性赔偿制度立法目的关键举措。
Abstract: With the establishment of the Science and Technology Innovation Board in 2019, it is of great sig-nificance how to apply the system of punishment and compensation to science and Technology Innovation Board. From the perspective of Positive Law, the author studies the punitive damages system under the Science and Technology Innovation Board in three parts. The first part discusses the significance of the application of punitive damages system. The second part is to carry on the research to the punitive damages subject system, including the relevant subject’s constitution, the applicability, the relations. The third part is the amount of punitive damages composition, appli-cable standards to explore. The author believes that a clear understanding of the relationship be-tween the subject of compensation, the subject of liability, the executive branch and social organi-zations is an important prerequisite for the perfection of the system of punitive damages, to balance the amount of punitive damages reasonably is the key measure to guarantee the realization of the legislative aim of punitive damages system.
文章引用:梁煜钊, 虞宗麟. 科创板下的惩罚性赔偿制度研究[J]. 法学, 2020, 8(3): 303-313. https://doi.org/10.12677/OJLS.2020.83044

参考文献

[1] 朱景文. 法理学[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2014.
[2] 刘文华. 经济法[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2019.
[3] 陈洁. 科创板注册制的实施机制与风险防范[J]. 法学, 2019(1): 148-157.
[4] 刘俊海. 构建投资者友好型科创板法治环境[J]. 资本市场, 2019(7): 87.
[5] 张群辉. 科创板双重股权结构制度研究——基于投资者保护的视角[J]. 上海金融, 2019(9): 17.
[6] 杨东. 论金融消费者概念界定[J]. 法学家, 2014(5): 64-76.
[7] 朱红, 李婧. 从行为法经济学看惩罚性赔偿制度在金融消费领域的适用[J]. 上海金融, 2017(4): 73-76+85.
[8] Del Rossi, A.F. and Viscusi, W.K. (2010) The Changing Landscape of Blockbuster Punitive Damages Awards. American Law and Economics Review, 12, 116-161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[9] Diamond, P. (2002) Integrating Punishment and Efficiency Concerns in Punitive Damages for Reckless Disregard Risks to Others. The Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 18, 117-139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[10] Markel, D. (2009) How Should Punitive Damages Work. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 157, 1383.
[11] Galligan Jr., T.C. (2005) The Risks of and Reactions to Underdeterrence in Torts. The Missouri Law Review, 70, 691-692.
[12] Colby, T.B. (2003) Beyond the Multiple Punishment Problem: Punitive Damages as Punishment for Individual. Private Wrongs. Minnesota Law Review, 87, 583.
[13] Moller, E.K., Pace, N.M. and Carroll, S.J. (1999) Punitive Damages in Financial Injury Jury Verdicts. The Journal of Legal Studies, 28, 283-339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[14] 王利明. 美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究[J]. 比较法研究, 2003(9): 1-15.
[15] 胡乐明, 刘刚, 李晓阳. 新制度经济学原理[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2019.
[16] Feinberg, P.C. (1992) Federal Income Taxation of Punitive Damages Awarded in Personal Injury Actions. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 42, 339-341.
[17] 朱大旗, 李帅. 法治视野下的司法预算建构模式[J]. 中国社会科学, 2016(10): 116-133.