国际金融准则与《墨卡托利亚法》的解释力

Cally Jordan
{"title":"国际金融准则与《墨卡托利亚法》的解释力","authors":"Cally Jordan","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2107943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The global financial crisis has cast a strong light on some hitherto obscure corners of the financial world, provoking an outpouring of calls for concerted international action. “Hard law” having disappointed, can “soft law”, in the form of international financial standards, substitute for traditional national legislation. This article examines some of the difficulties associated with the “international standards as soft law” discourse. First of all, conceptual problems in the “soft law” discourse itself reveal profoundly different patterns of legal thought cutting across national boundaries, resulting in different understandings of international financial standards. Secondly, recent experience, over the past decade, with some “soft law” international financial standards as both diagnostic and prophylactic tools, has been decidedly mixed, in fact, largely unsatisfactory. Thirdly, the “soft law” discourse in international finance appears strangely remote from the daily grind of international commercial practice, where the discourse is largely unknown. But perhaps in this disconnect between theory and practice lies clues to important normative forces at work in international finance, and in particular the international capital markets. The more one considers the world of international finance, the more obvious become the outlines of centuries old transnational merchant law, the contentious lex mercatoria. The proposition put forward here is that the formal regulation of financial markets is supported by a body of strong and persistent customary law, a lex mercatoria, a rarely acknowledged but powerful undercurrent in finance, especially in its international iteration. The continued prevalence of oral contracting and the stubborn persistence of self-regulatory principles are examples. There are several intriguing implications to this proposition. Is it possible that the global financial crisis represented not only a failure of formal, state-led regulation, as it surely did, but also a breakdown of a lex mercatoria of finance? If that is the case, international standard setters and national regulators, both, ignore this lex mercatoria (the customs and practices of international finance) at their peril. To do so, would be to miss a true, powerful, source of normativity operating in international financial markets.","PeriodicalId":198490,"journal":{"name":"Georgetown Law Center Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper Series","volume":"143 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"International Financial Standards and the Explanatory Force of Lex Mercatoria\",\"authors\":\"Cally Jordan\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2107943\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The global financial crisis has cast a strong light on some hitherto obscure corners of the financial world, provoking an outpouring of calls for concerted international action. “Hard law” having disappointed, can “soft law”, in the form of international financial standards, substitute for traditional national legislation. This article examines some of the difficulties associated with the “international standards as soft law” discourse. First of all, conceptual problems in the “soft law” discourse itself reveal profoundly different patterns of legal thought cutting across national boundaries, resulting in different understandings of international financial standards. Secondly, recent experience, over the past decade, with some “soft law” international financial standards as both diagnostic and prophylactic tools, has been decidedly mixed, in fact, largely unsatisfactory. Thirdly, the “soft law” discourse in international finance appears strangely remote from the daily grind of international commercial practice, where the discourse is largely unknown. But perhaps in this disconnect between theory and practice lies clues to important normative forces at work in international finance, and in particular the international capital markets. The more one considers the world of international finance, the more obvious become the outlines of centuries old transnational merchant law, the contentious lex mercatoria. The proposition put forward here is that the formal regulation of financial markets is supported by a body of strong and persistent customary law, a lex mercatoria, a rarely acknowledged but powerful undercurrent in finance, especially in its international iteration. The continued prevalence of oral contracting and the stubborn persistence of self-regulatory principles are examples. There are several intriguing implications to this proposition. Is it possible that the global financial crisis represented not only a failure of formal, state-led regulation, as it surely did, but also a breakdown of a lex mercatoria of finance? If that is the case, international standard setters and national regulators, both, ignore this lex mercatoria (the customs and practices of international finance) at their peril. To do so, would be to miss a true, powerful, source of normativity operating in international financial markets.\",\"PeriodicalId\":198490,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Georgetown Law Center Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"143 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Georgetown Law Center Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2107943\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgetown Law Center Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2107943","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

全球金融危机让金融界一些迄今尚不为人知的角落暴露无遗,引发了要求国际社会采取协调一致行动的呼声。“硬法”已经失望,可以“软法”,以国际金融标准的形式,代替传统的国家立法。本文探讨了与“国际标准作为软法”话语相关的一些困难。首先,“软法”话语中的概念问题本身揭示了跨越国界的深刻不同的法律思维模式,从而导致对国际金融标准的不同理解。其次,在过去十年中,一些“软法律”国际金融标准作为诊断和预防工具的经验显然是混杂的,事实上,在很大程度上令人不满意。第三,国际金融中的“软法”话语似乎与国际商业实践的日常工作有着奇怪的距离,在国际商业实践中,这种话语在很大程度上是未知的。但在理论与实践之间的这种脱节中,或许存在着一些线索,可以揭示国际金融,尤其是国际资本市场中起作用的重要规范力量。对国际金融领域研究得越多,几个世纪以来的跨国商人法(即有争议的商法)的轮廓就越明显。这里提出的主张是,对金融市场的正式监管是由一套强大而持久的习惯法、一种商业法(lex mercatoria)支持的,这是一种很少被承认但却强大的金融暗流,尤其是在其国际迭代中。口头契约的持续流行和自我调节原则的顽固坚持就是例子。这个命题有几个有趣的含义。全球金融危机是否有可能不仅代表了正式的、国家主导的监管的失败(确实如此),还代表了金融重商法的崩溃?如果是这样的话,国际标准制定者和各国监管机构都忽视了这种“商事法”(国际金融的惯例和做法),后果自负。如果这样做,就会错过一个真正的、强大的、在国际金融市场上运作的规范性来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
International Financial Standards and the Explanatory Force of Lex Mercatoria
The global financial crisis has cast a strong light on some hitherto obscure corners of the financial world, provoking an outpouring of calls for concerted international action. “Hard law” having disappointed, can “soft law”, in the form of international financial standards, substitute for traditional national legislation. This article examines some of the difficulties associated with the “international standards as soft law” discourse. First of all, conceptual problems in the “soft law” discourse itself reveal profoundly different patterns of legal thought cutting across national boundaries, resulting in different understandings of international financial standards. Secondly, recent experience, over the past decade, with some “soft law” international financial standards as both diagnostic and prophylactic tools, has been decidedly mixed, in fact, largely unsatisfactory. Thirdly, the “soft law” discourse in international finance appears strangely remote from the daily grind of international commercial practice, where the discourse is largely unknown. But perhaps in this disconnect between theory and practice lies clues to important normative forces at work in international finance, and in particular the international capital markets. The more one considers the world of international finance, the more obvious become the outlines of centuries old transnational merchant law, the contentious lex mercatoria. The proposition put forward here is that the formal regulation of financial markets is supported by a body of strong and persistent customary law, a lex mercatoria, a rarely acknowledged but powerful undercurrent in finance, especially in its international iteration. The continued prevalence of oral contracting and the stubborn persistence of self-regulatory principles are examples. There are several intriguing implications to this proposition. Is it possible that the global financial crisis represented not only a failure of formal, state-led regulation, as it surely did, but also a breakdown of a lex mercatoria of finance? If that is the case, international standard setters and national regulators, both, ignore this lex mercatoria (the customs and practices of international finance) at their peril. To do so, would be to miss a true, powerful, source of normativity operating in international financial markets.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信