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.

本網站上所有資料內容(「內容」)均屬理慈國際科技法律事務所所有。本所保留所有權利,除非獲得本所事前許可外,均不得以任何形式或以任何方式重製、下載、散布、發行或移轉本網站上之內容。

所有內容僅供作參考且非為特定議題或具體個案之法律或專業建議。所有內容未必為最新法律及法規之發展,本所及其編輯群不保證內容之正確性,並明示聲明不須對任何人就信賴使用本網站上全部或部分之內容,而據此所為或經許可而為或略而未為之結果負擔任何及全部之責任。撰稿作者之觀點不代表本所之立場。如有任何建議或疑義,請與本所聯繫。

作者

Katty
Katty