證券仲裁制度之研究-兼論美國證券仲裁制度

The Study on The Arbitration of Securties Regulation

吳珮韶(Pei-Shau Wu)

指導教授 ： 吳光明

中原大學/商學院/財經法律研究所/碩士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/cycu200900125

摘要

摘 要
投資人因證券交易而發生糾紛時，通常採取以下五種方式來解決：（1）向主管機關「證券交易管理委員會」或「證券交易所」提出檢舉，藉以達到損害賠償之目的；（2）由當事人間自行解決；（3）利用證券商公會之證券調解制度；（4）利用商務仲裁制度，解決爭議；（5）依民事訴訟程序，或刑事附帶民事之訴訟程序，以解決糾紛。惟上述五種方式各有利弊，又證券交易相關糾紛之解決攸關證券市場之健全發展，而證券市場之管理又經常自成體系，有其特殊性，故以仲裁解決證券交易相關糾紛已發展為健全證券市場或交易制度所不可或缺之一環。
由於有關證券爭議之仲裁，係規定於現行證券交易第六章，惟證券交易法對仲裁事項未規範者適用商務仲裁條例，因此，本文將首先探討我國仲裁制度及仲裁法相關規定，並且釐清仲裁所可能涉及之基本問題。
其次，本文將介紹證券爭議之基本概念，以及證券仲裁之概念，釐清證券爭議之範疇，並探討證券仲裁的法源及相關法規，並檢討目前實務上證券爭議仲裁之相關問題。
此外，美國是證券仲裁制度的發源地，有近200年的歷史，證券仲裁已經成爲其解決證券爭議的主要方式。經歷多年的發展，美國發展出一套比較完善而行之有效的證券爭議仲裁制度，其中許多規則具有鮮明的特色和優點，可以給我們不少啓發，值得我國在健全證券仲裁制度時加以借鑒和參照，因此本文將介紹美國證券仲裁發展過程中重要的案例及其影響，並分析美國法院對證券爭議仲裁之傾向的轉變，「他山之石可以攻錯」，希望藉由外國立法例之認識，比較出我國證券仲裁制度之優缺點，並進而提出一些利於我國證券仲裁之相關制度、規定之修正建議。
最後檢討我國仲裁機構之設置與現行法之缺失，期望能建構出證券仲裁之合理化制度，進而提供立法者做為未來立法之參考。
關鍵字：證券、仲裁、仲裁人、證券仲裁、證券交易法、美國、聯邦仲裁法

關鍵字

美國 ； 證券交易法 ； 證券 ； 仲裁 ； 仲裁人 ； 證券仲裁 ； 聯邦仲裁法

並列摘要

Abstract

In practice, there are five ways for the investors to solve the disputes of securities trading: (1) report the offense to the authorities like SEC or securities exchange for the purpose of remedy, (2) concerned parties settle by themselves, (3) use securities mediation system, (4) resort to arbitration, (5) bring out the litigation. However, above five ways are with merits and demerits, and the solutions to disputes of securities are important to the development of securities market. The management of securities market is specific and systemic; therefore arbitration is increasingly vital to settle the securities disputes.
Since Chapter Sixth of securities regulations regulates the securities arbitration, but those will be applied to Arbitration Law when they are not regulated by securities regulations. Consequently, this study will first examine system of arbitration and Arbitration Law and as well will elaborate on the fundamental aspects in which arbitration may involve.
Secondly, this writing will introduce the basic concepts of securities disputes together with securities arbitration and to gain a better understanding of what is category of securities disputes. Meantime, relevant statutes will be inducted and its legal character will be assessed in order to analyze factors of real cases happened in practice.
Moreover, the United States is the mother country of securities arbitration, with about 200 years of history and securities arbitration becomes the main solution to securities disputes. After several years of development, securities arbitration in the United States is increasingly matured and with blazing advantages for its regulations which could inspire us well, especially when we re-contract ours. Hence, this study will provide examples from securities arbitration legislative procedures in the United States as well as its influence, examining the shift in the court of incline to securities arbitration. By careful perusal of legislative procedures in the United States, the comparison in regards to what are advantages and disadvantages of our system will further provide some suggestions beneficial to amend our relevant frame and regulations.
Finally, demerits of our arbitration organization and existing regulations will be analyzed in hope that a more reasonable system of securities arbitration could be established and that will become reference for future lawmakers.

Key words: securities, arbitration, arbitrator, securities arbitration, FAA

並列關鍵字

securities ； arbitration ； arbitrator ； securities arbitration ； FAA

參考文獻

14.陳煥文，仲裁法逐條釋義，作者自版（1999）。

17.楊建華，民事訴訟法要論，三民書局（2005）。

2. 何兆龍，我國仲裁制度問題之研究，東海大學法律學研究所論文（1995）。

13. 吳光明，再論證券爭議之仲裁──兼論最高法院九十一年度台上字第二三六七號判決及相關問題」，仲裁，第70期（2004）。

4. 李貴英，一九九六年英國新仲裁法評析，法學叢刊，第43卷第1 期（1998）。