论文部分内容阅读
联邦最高法院关于United States v.O’Hagan一案所作判决已经被广泛认为是对关于内幕交易传统理论的背离,在此判决中一种新的责任理论作为传统理论的替代,也颇受质疑。这种新出现的理论被称为内幕交易的“盗用”理论,该理论认为,被禁止的是——从事证券交易的行为人由于对未公开的信息负有某种诚信义务,而却违背这种诚信义务,运用该信息进行交易。在O’Hagan一案中,一位律师知道Pillsbury即将被要约收购,于是利用他所知道的,涉及Pillsbury的相关兼并“内幕”消息进行Pillsbury股票交易,其消息来源于该律师所在事务所,发出收购要约的公司是该所客户,法庭认为该律师应获有罪判决。采纳盗用理论的情况下,法庭比照1934年的证券交易法(交易
The Federal Supreme Court’s judgment on United States v. O’Hagan has been widely considered as a departure from the traditional theory of insider trading, in which a new theory of responsibility as a substitute for traditional theory is also being questioned. This emerging theory is called the theory of “theft” of insider trading. According to this theory, it is forbidden that the perpetrator engaged in securities transactions, because of some obligation of good faith to undisclosed information, In violation of this obligation of good faith, the use of the information for trading. In the case of O’Hagan, a lawyer knew that Pillsbury was about to be acquired and therefore used the Pillsbury stock trades he knew about Pillsbury’s related merger “insider information,” based on the law firm’s firm, The company that issued the offer was the client and the court found the solicitor guilty of a guilty verdict. Under the doctrine of theft, the court follows the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (dealing