日本公開收購法制之規範架構、特色及對我國法之啟示

The Regulatory Framework and Characteristics of Japan’s Tender Offers Regulations and Their implications for Taiwan’s Tender Offers

本文從對我國證交法現行公開收購規範可能蘊藏的法制缺失及違憲疑慮出發，藉由日本金融商品取引法公開收購制度重要實體規定之檢討，確認、檢證上開證交法可能存在的法制缺失或違憲疑慮是否確實存在，經由與日本法制之對照、比較後發現：我國現行證交法公開收購相關規定，不僅從一開始其規範目的及所欲保護之法益即未能明確釐清、甚至不能稱為其曾存在過，且相關重要概念模糊曖昧不明、其間規範架構、內容及邏輯充斥著矛盾與衝突、甚至出現各種規範漏洞與不足，就罪刑法定主義明確性原則、比例原則等以觀，實難肯定其得作為法治國家併購制度之基本規範。於此認知下，為避免該等法制缺失、違憲疑慮持續存在，危害我國公開收購、併購機制之健全發展，遂嘗試從日本法之比較法研究中，探求其可對我國法未來修正方向與內容之啟示，以提供立法機關及證券交易主管機關未來法律修正之參考。

Starting from the possible legal deficiencies and unconstitutional doubts that may be hidden in the current tender offters regulations of Taiwan’s Securities and Exchange Act, this article reviews the important substantive provisions of Japan’s Financial Instruments and Exchange Act regarding the tender offers system. The purpose is to confirm and verify whether the legal deficiencies or unconstitutional doubts that may exist in Taiwan’s Securities and Exchange Act are indeed present. By comparing and contrasting with Japan’s tender offers regulations, it was found that the current relevant provisions of Taiwan’s Securities and Exchange Act regarding tender offers not only fail to clarify their regulatory purposes and the legal interests they seek to protect, but also have vague and ambiguous important concepts, inconsistent and conflicting regulatory structures, contents and logic, and various regulatory loopholes and deficiencies. It is difficult to affirm its basic norms as a rule of law country’s merger and acquisition system, based on principles such as the principle of clarity of Nulla poena sine lege and principle of proportionality. With this understanding, in order to avoid the continuous existence of such legal deficiencies and unconstitutional doubts, and to safeguard the sound development of Taiwan’s tender offers and merger mechanism, this article attempts to explore the enlightenment that Japan’s law may provide for the future direction and content of Taiwan’s law revision through comparative law research, to provide a reference for legislative bodies and securities regulators for future legal revisions.