論Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo：美國證券詐欺因果關係要件之再建構與對我國證券交易法制之啟示

證券詐欺規範，除對受害投資人提供救濟外，亦可嚇阻證券詐欺之發生，更關乎證券市場健全與投資人信心；各國證券詐欺法制，皆致力尋求「行為人責任」與「投資人保護」之均衡。美國證券詐欺之信賴要件與損失因果關係要件，即著眼於此。美國判例法於採行效率市場假說與對市場詐欺理論後，呈現由「信賴要件推定」朝向「損失因果關係要件推定」發展之趨勢，此將使其失去調和功能外，亦使證券詐欺理論產生概念的混淆。美國聯邦最高法院Dura一案，有效導正此發展趨勢，於美國證券交易法制，影響深遠；此亦為我國證券交易法制，帶來借鏡攻錯之參考。

關鍵字

證券詐欺；因果關係；信賴；交易因果關係；損失因果關係

並列摘要

Besides their remedial and deterrent functions, the anti-fraud provisions of securities regulation play an essential role in promoting the integrity of the securities market and investor confidence. Accordingly, framers of securities regulation in different jurisdictions share a view to balance 〞wrongdoer accountability〞 and 〞investor protection〞. The pleading rules of 〞reliance〞 and 〞loss causation〞 in private securities fraud cases are crafted for this very purpose. After the Court's adoption of the 〞efficient market hypothesis〞 and the 〞fraud-on-the-market theory〞, there is a perceived trend to read 〞fraud-on-the-market theory〞 broadly in order to extend the presumption from 〞reliance〞 to 〞loss causation〞. Without a doubt, this will be to the detriment of the development of securities regulation and creates confusion. The Supreme Court's Dura decision effectively rectified the expansive reading and had profound implications for U.S. securities regulation and will henceforth serve as an influential and informative reference for securities law in Taiwan.