On March 27th, the Beijing Financial Court released the "White Paper on Securities Dispute Adjudication" based on its four-year trial practice, reporting on the court's securities dispute adjudication situation. According to the white paper, from March 18, 2021 to December 31, 2024, the Beijing Financial Court accepted a total of 9246 securities dispute cases, accounting for 44.07% of all civil and commercial cases received. The total amount of securities dispute cases reached 43.824 billion yuan, with an average litigation amount of approximately 4.7398 million yuan per case. Among the securities disputes accepted by the Beijing Financial Court, there were 9101 cases of securities fraud liability disputes, ranking first, followed by 68 cases of securities trading contract disputes, 27 cases of securities repurchase contract disputes, 18 cases of margin trading and securities lending disputes, 14 cases of financial derivative trading disputes, and 18 cases of other causes of action. It is reported that the Beijing Financial Court has accepted securities disputes involving a total of 57 accused issuers, forming a series of 57 cases, covering the Shanghai Stock Exchange Main Board, Shenzhen Stock Exchange Main Board, ChiNext Board, New Third Board, Beijing Stock Exchange, and Hong Kong Stock Exchange. The white paper reveals that among the 57 sued issuers tried by the Beijing Financial Court, 45 issuers were subject to administrative penalties, accounting for 79%; 12 issuers have not been subject to administrative penalties, accounting for 21%. Meanwhile, three issuers have been initiated into criminal proceedings on suspicion of criminal offenses. In the 57 series of cases, in addition to the issuer as the defendant, the defendants also include 188 directors, supervisors, and senior management personnel (hereinafter referred to as directors, supervisors, and senior executives) of 27 issuers. 105 directors, supervisors, and senior executives were subject to administrative penalties, accounting for 55.85%. A total of 34 intermediary agencies were sued, and 12 were subject to administrative penalties, accounting for 35.29%. Securities misrepresentation liability disputes are the most common type of securities disputes. From the perspective of behavior, false statements include false records, misleading statements, significant omissions, and failure to disclose as required. Financial fraud is a concrete manifestation of false statements and the most common illegal behavior. The scope of false statements is broader, including not only financial fraud, but also false disclosure of other non-financial information and undisclosed information. It is common for regulatory authorities to make administrative penalty decisions against issuers involving multiple false statements Introduction by Xue Feng, member of the Party Group and Vice President of Beijing Financial Court. According to the white paper, among the 57 series of cases, except for the 2 series of cases currently under investigation by the China Securities Regulatory Commission that have not yet clarified false statements, the remaining 55 series of cases involve 31 false records, 33 significant omissions, and 4 misleading statements. From the perspective of behavioral purpose, false statement behavior includes both induced multiple false statements and induced empty false statements. Among the 57 series of cases, 53 involved false statements of the inducement type, accounting for 92.98%. One false statement involving the lure type, accounting for only 1.75%. The proportion of false statements involving both the lure type and the lure type is 5.26%. The white paper points out that securities dispute cases exhibit the following characteristics: in order to better protect their legitimate rights and interests, investors not only sue the issuer, but also sue the issuer's controlling shareholders, actual controllers, directors, supervisors, and intermediaries, demanding that the relevant responsible parties bear joint and several liability for compensation, which has become normalized. With the application of extraterritorial provisions in the Securities Law (revised in 2019), there is an increasing number of cases involving overseas listed issuers; With the continuous enrichment of financing channels, the structure and trading mode of financial innovation products will become more complex and specialized, such as major shareholders' illegal reduction of holdings leading to securities fraud claims; Civil claims for insider trading and market manipulation; The delisting of listed companies combined with securities fraud has led to claims cases; New situations and issues such as the application of laws in specific bond markets are gradually increasing. (New Society)