China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

China’s First ABS Fraudulent Issuance Case: Compensation of CNY 560 Million

Mon, 21 Aug 2023
Categories: China Legal Trends

In May 2023, the Shanghai Financial Court (SFC) concluded China’s first civil compensation case for fraudulent asset-backed securities (ABS) issuance.

The case refers to the plaintiff Postal Saving Bank of China Co., Ltd v. defendants Kunshan Meijite Dengdu Management Co., Ltd (“Meijite”), Huatai United Securities Co., Ltd (“Huatai Securities”), Shanghai Fucheng HFT Asset Management Co., Ltd (“the Manager”), China Chengxin Bong Rating Data Technology Co., Ltd (“CCXR”), and Beijing King & Wood Mallesons (“KWM”), (see Postal Saving Bank of China Co., Ltd v. Kunshan Meijite Dengdu Management Co., Ltd et al. (2020) Hu 74 Min Chu No. 1801).

On 26 July 2016, the plaintiff entered into a subscription agreement with the Manager to subscribe for a total nominal amount of CNY 967 million of the underlying securities of Meijite. KWM, CCXR, and Huatai Securities were the legal advisors, rating agencies, and financial advisors, respectively, for the securities in question.

In November 2016, the securities in question were listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange. Upon maturity of the securities, the plaintiff received only a partial payment of principal and interest.

Believing that the above five defendants constituted a fraudulent issuance and caused substantial losses, the plaintiff filed a civil lawsuit with the SFC.

The SFC held that the underlying assets of the relevant securities and their cash flows were grossly misstated, and accordingly:

  • Meijite should compensate the plaintiff for the loss of principal and interest due to the fraudulent issuance of securities;
  • Huatai Securities should be jointly and severally liable for damages for intentionally concealing the fact of fraudulent issuance by the issuer; and
  • The Manager, CCXR, and KWM were each grossly negligent in the preparation and issuance of the false statements in the disclosure documents and were jointly and severally liable within the scope of their responsibilities.

 

 

Photo by Vardan Papikyan on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

You might also like

China Regulates Takeout Marketing to Curb Food Waste

In November 2024, China issued new guidelines restricting food delivery marketing to curb waste by prohibiting promotions that encourage overeating, setting reasonable order quantities, and optimizing discount mechanisms.

China's First Third-Party Funding Arbitration Case Named Top Ten by Beijing Court

In November 2024, the Beijing Fourth Intermediate People's Court selected China's first third-party funding-related arbitration case (Ruili Airlines Co., Ltd. et al. v. CLC Aircraft Leasing (Tianjin) Co., Ltd.(2022) Jing 04 Min Te No. 368-369 ), as one of its top ten typical cases, setting a precedent for judicial review of arbitration involving third-party funding.

SPC Publishes First Maritime Guiding Cases

In November 2024, China’s Supreme People's Court (SPC) published its first batch of maritime guiding cases, addressing key issues such as maritime cargo contracts, ship collisions, and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments.

China Revises Anti-Money Laundering Law

China's newly revised Anti-Money Laundering Law, effective January 1, 2025, strengthens regulations on financial institutions, enhances AML obligations, and includes measures to prevent terrorist financing.

Chinese Supreme Court Judgment Enforced by Court of NSW Australia

In October 2024, the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Australia ruled to enforce a Chinese monetary judgment (Fujian Rongtaiyuan Industrial Co Ltd v Zhan [2024] NSWSC 1318). The Chinese judgment was made by the Fujian High People’s Court, which was affirmed by a judgment of China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) in 2021.