In order to effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of financial consumers and investors, standardize the operating behavior of financial institutions, and create a good financial legal environment, today, the Supreme People's Court, the People's Bank of China, the State Financial Supervision Administration, and the China Securities Regulatory Commission jointly released six typical cases on the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of financial consumers and investors.
The cases released this time cover financial lending, fund management, digital finance, personal insurance, securities investment and other fields, focusing on practical hot spots and judicial difficulties such as standard clauses, fair transactions, suitability obligations, rights relief, and diverse dispute resolution. They focus on demonstrating the value guidance of financial trials on the high-quality development of the financial industry and demonstrating the exemplary significance of building a fair, transparent, honest, and safe financial market ecosystem.
First, adhere to legal protection and strengthen the obligation to explain standard clauses. In accordance with legal provisions, the people's courts properly grasp the dialectical relationship between equal protection and preferential protection, freedom of contract and contractual justice in hearing financial disputes, so that the people can truly make independent decisions and enjoy financial services fairly. Case 1 clarifies that financial institutions have the obligation to provide reminders and explanations on the format clauses for adjusting loan interest rates, demonstrating the value orientation of protecting financial consumers' rights to fair transactions and rights to know in accordance with the law.
The second is to consolidate institutional responsibilities and implement suitability management and seller due diligence. Financial trials and financial supervision move in parallel and advance collaboratively, prompting financial institutions to strictly implement their suitability obligations. Case 2 and Case 3, it was determined according to law that sales institutions failed to fulfill their obligation to sell appropriate financial products and should bear corresponding liability for compensation, promoting the true implementation of the principle of "seller shall be responsible, buyer beware", forcing financial institutions to improve their internal control and compliance systems and embed the protection of consumer rights and interests into the entire operation process.
The third is to break down technical barriers and ensure that financial consumers have the right to choose relief procedures. With the development of digital technology, while financial institutions are accelerating the development of technological financial services, they are also taking advantage of technological advantages to take the initiative in financial transactions and dispute resolution methods, and have formulated some unreasonable conditions for financial consumers, which urgently need to be regulated. Case 4 makes it clear that fund companies relying on the advantages of App technology to force changes in dispute resolution methods after consumers subscribe to products do not have legal effect.
The fourth is collaborative governance to give full play to the function of multiple substantive dispute resolution mechanisms. Adhering to the multi-substantive and efficient resolution of disputes in the financial field is the common goal of justice and supervision. In view of the characteristics of financial cases, with the support and cooperation of regulatory authorities, the People's Court comprehensively used diversified settlements, mediation and reconciliation, model judgments, representative litigation and other work measures to simplify the rights protection process, shorten the disposal time limit, reduce the rights protection costs, provide financial consumers and small and medium-sized investors with a convenient, efficient, and low-cost dispute resolution method, and achieved good dispute resolution results. Case Five used legal mediation, eliminating the long period of initiating judicial appraisal, and enabled the policy holder to obtain critical illness insurance claims in a relatively short period of time; Case Six innovatively and comprehensively used "model judgment + entrusted mediation + representative litigation" to exert the function of a multi-substantive dispute resolution mechanism and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of many small and medium-sized investors.
Case 1:
Financial institutions have the obligation to provide reminders and explanations on the format clauses for adjusting loan interest rates - a bank v. Pan and Li financial loan contract dispute case
Case 2:
A bank shall not be exempted from suitability obligations on the grounds that it does not engage in deceptive or misleading marketing behavior - Su Mou v. Bank Entrusted Financial Management Contract Dispute Case
Case three:
Securities institutions should implement "seller's due diligence" when selling private equity fund products - Yang Moumou v. a securities business department and a third party, Chen Moumou, an investment management center financial entrustment management contract dispute case
Case four:
Fund companies rely on the advantages of App technology to forcefully change the dispute resolution method after subscribing to products, which has no legal effect - Fang Mou v. a fund company over property damage compensation dispute case
Case five:
Efficiently resolve critical illness insurance claim disputes through legal mediation and promptly relieve the rights and interests of the parties - Wu v. a life insurance company over a personal insurance contract dispute case
Case six:
Innovate "model judgment + entrusted mediation + representative litigation" to give full play to the combined power of multiple dispute resolutions - a securities misrepresentation liability dispute case of a listed company
(CCTV reporter Zhang Sai)
