August 2017

The scope of litigation rights granted to the Securities and Futures Investors Protection Center is limited to the objectives and scope set forth in its by-laws, and litigation rights apply only when investors or traders are injured due to unlawful transactions engaged by listed (OTC-traded) companies, securities firms or commissioned futures merchants or to occurrence of unlawful transactions(Taiwan)

2016.08.17
Oli Wong

The Supreme Court rendered the 105-Tai-Shang-1380 Civil Decision of August 17, 2016 (hereinafter, the "Decision"), holding that litigation rights granted to the Securities and Futures Investors Protection Center (hereinafter, the "Protection Center") apply only when investors or traders are injured due to unlawful transactions.

According to the facts underlying this Decision, the Appellants of this case asserted as follows. The Appellee announced that the declaration of dividends which had been approved by the shareholders' meeting would be suspended pursuant to a resolution adopted by the board of directors. As a result, the shareholders of the company granted the Protection Center with litigation rights in accordance with Article 28 of the Securities Investor and Futures Trader Protection Law (hereinafter, the "Law") so that the Protection Center may file a complaint in its own name to seek dividend payment to the shareholders.

According to the Decision, Article 28 of the Law stipulates that securities investors or futures traders may grant litigation rights to the protection agency (the Appellant or the Protection Center) over a securities or futures matter for which they are injured and which is caused by the same reason in order to protect disadvantaged investors and strike a balance between public interest and the promotion of the sound development of securities and futures markets. Therefore, the scope of litigation rights granted to the Protection Center should be limited to the objectives and scope set forth in its by-laws and litigation rights apply only when a listed (OTC-traded) company, securities firm or commissioned futures merchant engages in illegal transactions or acts such as false financial statements, hollowing out of companies or insider trading to the extent that the investors or traders are injured.

As a result, it was held in the Decision that since the matter in which Appellants sought dividend and damages for failure to receive dividends in the capacity of shareholders was not a matter that allows litigation rights to be granted under Article 28 of the Law, the Appellants were not an appropriate party to this case. Since the original decision was not erroneous, the appeal was dismissed.

本网站上所有资料内容(「内容」)均属理慈国际科技法律事务所所有。本所保留所有权利,除非获得本所事前许可外,均不得以任何形式或以任何方式重制、下载、散布、发行或移转本网站上之内容。

所有内容仅供作参考且非为特定议题或具体个案之法律或专业建议。所有内容未必为最新法律及法规之发展,本所及其编辑群不保证内容之正确性,并明示声明不须对任何人就信赖使用本网站上全部或部分之内容,而据此所为或经许可而为或略而未为之结果负担任何及全部之责任。撰稿作者之观点不代表本所之立场。如有任何建议或疑义,请与本所联系。

作者

Katty
Katty