摘要
我国金融中心虽有一系列的金融调解机制,但其作用有限,以至于大部分金融争端为金融诉讼所解决,金融调解机制陷入了套数多但应用少的困境。金融调解机制的困境在于其与金融诉讼的比较中处于劣势,具体表现为金融调解未能兼具专业性、中立性、独立性、受案范围广和收费标准低的特性,金融调解协议无强制执行力,公众知悉度低。本文认为,我国金融中心可以采取将多套金融调解机制整合为一套金融调解机制、对大部分金融消费案件实行先调解后裁决制度、调解案件不收费或低收费的做法,来改变金融中心调解机制的比较劣势。
There is a series of financial mediation instruments in Ehina＇s financial centers. But, the role of them has not been fully utilized. So, the majority of financial disputes have been solved by the financial litiga- tion and the mechanism has developed to a dilemma that is ＂multiple instruments but little utilization＂. The causes resulting in the difficulty are that these instrmnents do not qualify simultaneously the characteristics of specialty, neutrality, independence, broad cases standing and low costs, that financial mediation agreements can not been enforced and that the instruments have been low public knowledge. As a result, the system is disadvantageous compared with the financial litigation. China can take some countermeasures such as melting the multiple instruments into one instrument, the mediation and finding of the most financial consuming disputes, and no charges or low cost for the mediation in order to change the current comparative disadvantage of the mechanism.
出处
《财经科学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2015年第6期43-51,共9页
Finance & Economics
基金
重庆市教委2013年人文社科一般项目"国际比较法视野下的重庆区域性金融中心法制建设研究"(项目编号:13SKN07)
关键词
金融中心
金融调解
金融诉讼
制度比较优势
Financial Center
Financial Mediation
Financial Litigation
Institutional Comparative Advantage
