Current location - Trademark Inquiry Complete Network - Futures platform - What legal risks do futures intermediaries bear?
What legal risks do futures intermediaries bear?
The intermediary shall independently bear the civil liability arising from the intermediary brokerage relationship. Therefore, the important legal concept of futures middleman is put forward for the first time. In the current futures market, a considerable number of people believe that futures brokers not only make intermediary introductions, but also engage in futures trading activities including investment consulting and trading agents. That is to say, individuals and organizations that are active in the futures market, do not have the status of employees of futures brokerage companies, and rely mainly on brokerage companies' share and commissions as labor remuneration through cooperation with futures investors are collectively referred to as futures intermediaries, such as brokers, account managers, investment consultants, etc. , has existed in the industry for a long time. It must be clearly pointed out that this understanding is inconsistent with the concept of futures intermediary in the strict legal sense. Expand the connotation and extension of the concept of futures intermediaries, including the functional scope of futures trading agents, entrusted financial managers and other roles, and blame the legal problems caused by trading agents on futures intermediaries. In fact, futures broker and futures trading agent are completely different legal concepts, and they are essentially different. According to the provisions of People's Republic of China (PRC) Contract Law on intermediaries, the so-called futures intermediaries refer to individuals or legal persons who introduce investors or futures companies to sign contracts or provide signing opportunities, and their main role is to play an intermediary role when investors enter into brokerage contracts with futures companies. Its intermediary behavior refers to reporting the information of concluding a contract or providing media services for concluding a contract. Although the middleman is also entrusted by the principal to facilitate the transaction service for the principal, the middleman only plays the role of the middleman in the transaction, neither any party nor his agent, and does not directly participate in the negotiation activities of the two parties, nor does it mean that the middleman expresses his intention to the rights and obligations of both parties. As far as the reality of the futures market is concerned, most futures intermediaries establish business cooperation relations with futures companies, and are entrusted by futures companies to develop the market, find customers, and promote the establishment of futures brokerage relations. The rights of futures intermediaries are mainly reflected in extracting remuneration according to the trading commission of developing customers. Its legal responsibility is mainly manifested in that the futures broker shall truthfully report the true situation of both parties and the relevant matters concerning the conclusion of the brokerage contract, and shall not conceal it. Otherwise, if the principal's interests are harmed by deliberately concealing important facts related to the conclusion of the contract or providing false information, he shall not only have the right to demand payment from the principal, but also be liable for damages. In the futures market, there are few disputes arising from the conclusion of futures brokerage contracts only through the intermediary of futures brokers. Most disputes are caused by the illegal agency behavior of futures trading agents. The so-called futures trading agent refers to the unit or individual entrusted by futures investors to engage in futures trading activities in the name of investors, or the personnel who perform the duties of staff of futures companies and provide trading services for investors' futures trading activities on behalf of futures companies. According to the specific circumstances of futures trading disputes, they are represented by the following different types of agency behaviors and bear different legal responsibilities: 1. Authorized organization. Futures investors stipulate in futures brokerage contracts that their designated agents will conduct trading activities on their behalf, including issuing trading orders, signing trading reports and even transferring trading funds. Futures investors often sign agency contracts (or power of attorney) with agents based on their trust in their business ability, stipulating their agency authority and mutual rights and obligations. Futures disputes caused by such agents include malicious speculation, concealing real trading results, expanding losses, encroaching on investors' funds, overdraft trading, arbitrage trading without investors' wishes, etc. The above disputes are entirely caused by the agent's violation of the agency contract, entrusted by investors and unfaithful performance of agency duties, which are limited to futures investors and agents. An agent shall bear civil liability for the losses caused to investors by his improper agency behavior. However, if an agent uses his position as an agent to encroach on the investor's funds in the form of reverse transaction, and the consequences are serious, and it is judged by the relevant judicial organs to constitute the crime of embezzlement, he shall also bear criminal legal responsibility and be punished. 2. No right to represent. Some people who are engaged in trading, without the authorization of futures investors, take the opportunity to help newcomers in the futures market or investors who are not familiar with futures trading, and trade the trading account number and trading password of futures investors without the permission of investors. If the investor approves the result of this transaction, the investor shall bear the responsibility of this transaction. But in general, investors will recognize this profitable transaction without authorization; Once the transaction loses money, investors will not recognize it, and disputes will arise. For such disputes, the judgment of legal liability is that if the futures company does not have sufficient evidence to prove that it is not at fault in the above-mentioned transactions, then according to the provisions of Article 19 of the Regulations, the futures company shall be liable for compensation to futures investors and has no right to bear joint and several liability as an agent. According to the law, the futures company has the right to recover from the unauthorized agent after assuming the liability for compensation to investors. If the futures brokerage company can prove that the trading agent's behavior is not at fault based on the futures brokerage contract signed with the investor or other evidence, then even if it accepts the trading instructions issued by the unauthorized agent without the authorization of the investor, and causes losses to the investor, the brokerage company should not be liable for compensation to the investor. Investors' losses can only be recovered from unauthorized agents. 3. Performance agency. This is a type that has caused more controversy in futures trading after the promulgation of the Regulations. Often, some futures companies recruit a large number of futures intermediaries in order to reduce operating costs and avoid litigation risks, while ignoring the effective management of these personnel. These intermediaries hold the market development materials entrusted by the brokerage company and mobilize investors to conclude futures brokerage contracts with the brokerage company in the name of the staff of the brokerage company. When concluding the brokerage contract, the brokerage company did not take the initiative to explain the identity of the broker to the investors, so as to prevent the trading agency risk after the broker became the trading agent of the investors. Instead, he deliberately cooperated with the broker, used the reputation of the brokerage company to obtain the trading authorization of investors, and deliberately blurred the identity of the broker in front of investors, so that investors had sufficient reasons to think that the broker was a staff member of the futures brokerage company, and continued to authorize the original broker as its trading agent after signing the futures brokerage contract. In this way, the transaction risk of the illegal agent is naturally passed on to the economic company. Once the judicial organ determines that the performance agency is established, then according to Article 9 of the Regulations, the futures brokerage company shall bear the corresponding civil liability for compensation. In order to avoid legal risks in this respect, brokerage companies should strengthen internal control measures, such as improving the terms of intermediary contracts and strengthening the constraints on intermediary behavior; When signing a futures brokerage contract with investors, explain the identity of the broker to investors, stipulate in the contract the legal consequences of the investor's entrustment of the broker's trading agent, and clarify their respective responsibilities. 4. Entrusted financial management. In the current futures market, a considerable number of people or institutions put forward certain conditions to cooperate with investors in order to attract investors' funds and entrust them to conduct futures trading. Generally speaking, they sign entrusted financial management agreements with investors, jointly invest funds according to the agreed proportion, open futures investment accounts in the name of investors, conduct futures trading with full authority, and share profits and risks according to the contract. This is manifested in the legal relationship of agency in form, but it is different from general agency. Generally speaking, agency is carried out by the agent in the name of the principal, and the principal bears the legal consequences of agency. But in this kind of agency, the agent also bears the legal consequences of this kind of agency in essence. This kind of agency dispute mainly shows that both partners break the contract, refuse to accept the responsibility of transaction losses, or fail to reach an agreement on profit distribution.