屠某诉王某相邻通行权纠纷案评析

发布时间：2018-05-03 03:41

本文选题：法定权利 + 附属权利　；参考：《湖南大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：我国《民法通则》第83条和《物权法》第87条都对相邻通行权进行了规定，但是，《民法通则》第83条和《物权法》第87条的规定过于抽象，法律条文设计笼统，很难为实践中解决相邻通行权纠纷案件提供明确的指导。样本案例的争议焦点是相邻通行权能否成为买卖合同的标的及相邻通行权能否继续履行。首先明确相邻通行权的性质是所有权内容的限制或延伸，而不是一种独立的物权。这一性质决定了相邻通行权不仅具有所有权的支配性的性质，而且具有附属于所有权而存在的附属性。至于相邻通行权能否成为买卖合同的客体，要从两方面来讨论。一方面，相邻通行权是法定权利，其设定与否不能通过合同进行约定。相邻通行权是附属权利，不能脱离作为独立权利的所有权而单独进入交易市场。另一方面，建立在相邻通行权基础之上的相邻通行权的具体内容能否约定，学术界存在很大争议，，存在“物权调整性规范说”和“行为禁制性规范说”。关于相邻通行权的规范属于物权调整性规范，因此建立在相邻通行权设定基础之上的对相邻通行权具体内容的约定是有效的。相邻通行权的有无是随不动产周围客观情况的变化而不断变化的。针对如何判断相邻通行权能否继续履行，讨论相邻通行权构成的要件及“必要”的标准。结合我国法律规定和审判实践来看，我国目前以唯一通道原则为标准。
[Abstract]:Article 83 of the General principles of Civil Law of China and Article 87 of the Law of Real Rights provide for the right of adjacent communication. However, the provisions of Article 83 of the General principles of Civil Law and Article 87 of the Law of Real Rights are too abstract, and the legal provisions are designed in general terms. It is difficult to provide clear guidance for the settlement of adjacent traffic disputes in practice. The controversial focus of the sample case is whether the adjacent traffic right can be the object of the contract of sale and purchase and whether the adjacent traffic right can continue to be fulfilled. Firstly, it is clear that the nature of adjacent right of passage is the restriction or extension of the content of ownership, rather than an independent real right. This property determines that the adjacent traffic right has not only the dominant property of ownership, but also the subsidiary property attached to ownership. As for whether the adjacent right of communication can become the object of the contract of sale and purchase, it should be discussed from two aspects. On the one hand, the adjacent right of passage is a legal right, its establishment or not can not be agreed through the contract. The adjacent right of passage is a subsidiary right and cannot be entered into the trading market independently from the ownership as an independent right. On the other hand, whether the concrete content of the adjacent right of passage based on the adjacent traffic right can be agreed, there is a lot of controversy in academic circles, and there are "the regulation of real right" and "the norm of behavior prohibition". The norm of the adjacent right of passage belongs to the regulative norm of real right, so the agreement on the concrete content of the adjacent traffic right based on the establishment of the adjacent traffic right is effective. The existence or not of the adjacent right of passage is constantly changing with the change of the objective conditions around the real estate. In view of how to judge whether the adjacent traffic right can continue to be fulfilled, this paper discusses the elements of the contiguous traffic right and the criterion of "necessity". According to our law and trial practice, our country is based on the principle of unique channel.
【学位授予单位】：湖南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D920.5;D923

【参考文献】