|
|
| 篇名 | 金融管制法規的法律明確性要求──以公開收購制度為研究核心 |
|---|---|
| 並列篇名 | The Requests for the Legal Certainty of Financial Supervisory Regulations—Focusing on the Study of the Tender Offer System |
| 作者 | 周伯翰 |
| 中文摘要 | 在金融管制法規領域，為使其主管機關能及時因應市場之快速變化而機動調整其管制法規之具體事項，因此在金融管制法規領域經常採用空白刑法之規範模式，由立法機關就某種違法行為之構成要件之全部或一部授權主管機關以其他法律規定、法規命令或行政處分等補充規範加以補充；惟該等金融管制法規與補充規範之內容是否符合法律明確性原則、罪刑法定原則及其所衍生之刑罰明確性原則、構成要件明確性原則、授權明確性原則所要求的規範標準，經常發生須依憲政原則審查之爭議問題。為能確實解決前述爭議問題，本文將對於相關爭議問題進行研究。此外，由於112年4月憲法法庭已就與強制公開收購有關的證券交易法及其補充規範進行相當充分之討論，該等討論的相關資料將作為本文之研究與討論之借鑑。 又為使本文之讀者能深入瞭解與強制公開收購有關的證券交易法及其補充規範之爭議所涉及的法律原則，以便本文之讀者能充分理解本文後續之分析討論，因此本文首先援用數則大法官會議解釋、憲法法庭112年憲判字第5號判決以及學者見解而對強制公開收購相關的證券交易法及其補充規範之爭議所涉及的法律原則之意義及其解釋加以說明。 其次，為使本文之讀者能充分瞭解台灣的證券交易法之「公開收購制度」及「強制公開收購制度」所參照的外國立法例，因此本文就台灣的證券交易法之「公開收購制度」所參照的美國Williams Act之主要內容和相關案例以及台灣的證券交易法之「強制公開收購制度」主要參照的英國「公開收購規則」之主要內容和相關案例進行說明。 再者，由於憲法法庭112年憲判字第5號判決對於與強制公開收購有關的證券交易法及其補充規範之爭議和其所涉及的法律原則有相當充分與深入之分析與討論，因此本文將對於憲法法庭112年憲判字第5號判決中的主要爭點及其理由與相關法規進行解析與研究。 最後，本文將以強制公開收購制度及其相關條文作為研究核心而進行檢討並提出建議，以作為台灣未來修訂金融管制法規及其補充規範之參考，而使該等金融管制法規及其補充規範皆能符合各種法律原則所要求的規範標準並能被妥適實施且符合社會期待。 |
| 英文摘要 | In the field of financial supervisory regulations, in order for the competent authorities to flexibly adjust the specific matters of their supervisory regulations in time to respond to rapid changes in the market, the normative model of blank criminal law is often adopted in the field of financial supervisory regulations, and the legislature authorizes the competent authorities to supplement all or part of the constituent elements of a certain illegal act with other legal provisions, regulatory orders or administrative sanctions; however, whether the contents of these financial supervisory regulations and supplementary regulations comply with the normative standards required by the Principle of the Legal Certainty, the Principle of the Statutory Crime and Punishment and the derived principles of the Principle of the Statutory Crime and Punishment: the Principle of the Penalty Certainty, the Principle of the Certainty of Constituent Elements, the Principle of the License Certainty often occurs controversial issues reviewed in accordance with constitutional principles. In order to truly resolve the aforementioned disputes, this article will conduct research on the related disputes. In addition, in April, 2023, the Constitutional Court has conducted the very thorough discussion on the Securities and Exchange Act and its supplementary regulations related to compulsory tender offers, so the relevant information from such discussion will be used as the reference to the research and discussion of this article. In order to enable the readers of this article to deeply understand the legal principles involved in the disputes over the Securities and Exchange Act and its supplementary regulations related to compulsory tender offers, so that the readers of this article can fully understand the subsequent analysis and discussion of this article, this article first quotes several explanations of the Conference of Grand Judges, Constitutional Court’s No. 5 Judgment of 2023, and the opinions of scholars to explain the meaning and interpretation of legal principles involved in disputes regarding the Securities and Exchange Act and its supplementary regulations related to compulsory tender offers. Next, in order to enable the readers of this article to fully understand the foreign legislation that the“tender offer system”and the“compulsory tender offer system”of Taiwan’s Securities and Exchange Act refers to, this article explain the main contents of the Williams Act of the United States and related cases referred to the“tender offer system”of Taiwan’s Securities and Exchange Act, and the main contents of the British“City Code on Takeovers and Mergers”and related cases mainly referred to the“compulsory tender offer system”of Taiwan’s Securities and Exchange Act. Moreover, since the Constitutional Court’s No. 5 Judgment of 2023 has a very full and in-depth analysis and discussion of the controversy and its legal principles of the Securities and Exchange Act and its supplementary regulations related to compulsory tender offers, this article will analyze and study the main issues and its reasons and relevant regulations in the Constitutional Court’s No. 5 Judgment of 2023. Finally, this article will use the compulsory tender offer system and its related provisions as the core of the study to review and make suggestions as references to Taiwan’s future revision of financial supervisory regulations and their supplementary regulations, so that these financial supervisory regulations and their supplementary regulations can conform to the normative standards required by various legal principles and can be properly implemented and meet social expectations. |
| 起訖頁 | 51-82 |
| 關鍵詞 | 金融管制法規、法律明確性原則、罪刑法定原則、刑罰明確性原則、構成要件明確性原則、授權明確性原則、公開收購、Financial Supervisory Regulations、the Principle of the Legal Certainty、the Principle of the Statutory Crime and Punishment、the Principle of the Penalty Certainty、the Principle of the Certainty of Constituent Elements、the Principle of the License Certainty、Tender Offers/Public Takeovers |
| 刊名 | 財產法暨經濟法 |
| 出版單位 | 臺灣財產法暨經濟法研究協會 |
| 期數 | 202403 (75期) |
| DOI | 10.53106/181646412024030075002 複製DOI DOI申請 |
| QRCode | |
|
