委托理财合同保底条款的效力认定

The Effectiveness Identification of Minimum-guarantee Clause of Trust Management Contract

由于我国法律的不健全以及证券市场的不规范,委托理财纠纷频繁发生。最高人民法院2003年11月拟出台《关于审理委托理财合同纠纷案件的若干规定》,经过几轮草拟,直到今天依然没有结果,导致对委托理财合同的调整几乎无法可依,不同法院对相同或类似案件的判决结果不尽相同,甚至相差甚远。保底条款在实际委托理财活动中出现很多,但对委托理财合同的性质没有法律明确规定,导致对保底条款的效力认定各不相同。因此,研究委托理财合同的性质以及保底条款的效力有现实意义。

Because our country＇ s law is not perfect and securities market is not standardized, trust management disputes have occurred frequently. The Supreme People＇ s Court was to issue ＂a number of provisions on trying disputes of trust management contract＂ in November 2003, after several rounds of drafting, there is no re- suits even today, hence, there is almost no law to regulate the trust management contract, decisions on the same or similar cases that different courts make are different, and even far. Minimum - guarantee clause often appears in actual activities of trust management, but because the nature of trust management contract is not clear legally, the effectiveness identification is different. Therefore, studying the nature of the trust management contract and the effectiveness of minimum -guarantee clause has practical significance.