Legal Standard for Materiality of Securities Misrepresentation: Rational Investor and Price Sensitivity Test
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/ehss.v11i.7517Keywords:
transaction causation, fraud-on-market theory, efficient market hypothesis.Abstract
In China's judicial practice, there are many difficulties in determining the transaction causation in misrepresentation securities transactions, and there is no uniform approach to the adoption of legal standards. Based on the current law, the latest judicial interpretation and cases, the author analyzed and identified limitations of the legal standards presently applied for transaction causation, and proposed a new method to apply the legal standards. The application of the rational investor standard should avoid the extreme tendency of over-weakness and over-strictness, and adhere to the combination of bottom-line thinking and the actual situation. The application of the price sensitivity standard should fully consider the shortcomings of its realistic basis, and avoid the simple application out of practicality, resulting in the determination of materiality losing scientificity. In addition, the rational investor standard and the price sensitivity standard have an inherent connection and consistency. The court should take the rational investor as the main judgment standard, and the price sensitivity standard as the bottom and supplement of the shortcomings of the rational investor standard, so as to reduce the uncertainty of judicial practice.
Downloads
References
Schlick v. Penn-Dixie Cement Corp., 551 F.2d 531 (2d Cir. 1977)
(2017) Shanghai Civil Final Judgment No. 431
(2018) Guangdong Civil Final Judgement No.1341
(2013) Changchun Civil Trail No. 00284
(2013) Shenzhen Civil Trail No. 46
Li Guoguang. Understanding and application of the judicial interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the trial of cases of misrepresentation in the securities market [M]. People's Court Press, 2015: 221.
Gong Lian Di, Xie Chun Hui. Determination of materiality of information in securities misrepresentation disputes [J]. People's Justice, 2014(12): 52-56.
Ding Yuxiang. The dispersion effect of the elimination of securities misrepresentation predicate procedure and its treatment[J]. Financial Law,2021(05):31-46.
(2019) Liaoning Civil Final Judgment No. 554
(2019) Hunan Civil Final Judgement 405-428
(2020) Sichuan Civil Final Judgment No. 1197
Jin Lijun. Research on Judicial Determination of Materiality of Securities Misrepresentation [D]. Gansu University of Political Science and Law, 2022.
Fan Jian. Re-clarification of the materiality element of securities misrepresentation: A critical reflection based on judicial practice[J]. Shenzhen Social Science 2021,4(06):106-115
SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. 401 F.2d 833 (2d Cir. 1968)
TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc. 426 U.S. 438 (1970)
Jia Jixing. Research on the determination of causality of securities misrepresentation [D]. Liaoning University, 2022.
Zheng Yu. Legal analysis of information disclosure system in China's securities market - a study based on the interpretation of legal norms in context[J]. Securities Law Court,2014,13(04):351-398.
Basic Inc. v. Levinson 485 U.S. 224 (1988)
Tang Xin, Zhang Ranran. The "materiality" of information disclosure in civil litigation for misrepresentation[J]. Securities Law Journal, 2020,28(01):254-265.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.






