论实质性违法建筑上的民事权利

发布时间：2018-01-11 14:37

本文关键词：论实质性违法建筑上的民事权利　出处：《华东政法大学》2015年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：自上世纪八十年代以来,违法建筑所引发的问题日益凸显,“湖南国企违建事件”、“南京史上最奢华违建”、“虎门违建事件”、“武汉违建事件”、“广东违建事件”、“南湖违建事件”、“三亚违建事件”、“信阳违建事件”等众多违建问题不断被媒体披露出来。这日益严重的违建问题引起了我国学界的关注,并逐渐成为学界的研究热点。对违法建筑的治理、防治、处罚、征收与补偿等诸多公法上的问题均有较为深入的研究,但私法上对其研究仅在近十几年才开始逐渐获得较多关注,违法建筑的所有权归属等私法问题均受到了学界的研究与探讨,但其研究成果并不理想,尚需更为深入的研究。同时,随着我国城镇化进程的不断加快,居民的房屋居住之压力日益加大,违法建筑也随之在数量上和种类上呈现加速增长趋势,违法建筑之上的私法问题也日益尖锐,对此问题的解决已达到刻不容缓的地步。虽然在当下,我国现行公法体系对违法建筑进行规范的条文已经为数不少,但在我国现行的私法体系中却难寻一个条文之踪迹,这种立法现状很难有效解决其上的私法问题。而且这种“重公而轻私”的立法现状影响着我国司法实践及理论研究的价值取向,重“权力”而轻“权利”已经成为当下处理违法建筑私法问题的普遍情况。这无疑是对法治的违背,是对公平正义的背离,是亟需予以纠正的。在此情状之下,笔者撰写本文来对违法建筑的私法问题进行探究,力求能够对违法建筑的私法问题进行细致地研究与讨论。本文对违法建筑的定义、种类及相关的法律问题予以界定,研究其基本属性。经过对我国立法背景及历程的梳理与研究可以发现,昔日的“违章建筑”是基于当时立法现状而产生的,然而随着立法的不断完善,其已属于现今的“违法建筑”之范畴。同时,无论该建筑物合法抑或非法,其建筑材料已失去可移动性,其物理属性及法律属性均已经发生转换,彼此连接共同成为一个客观上及法律上的不动产。虽然违法建筑会涉及到诸多私法之问题,但其仍属于“公法”之概念,其定义应当立足于公法。因此,违法建筑是指在未取得相应政府部门许可或未按许可规定情况下而进行擅自建造及超过许可、批准的期限而继续使用的建筑物、构筑物及其他设施,并产生违反我国法律、法规、规章之规定的结果。为了更好的研究违法建筑,实务界和学界对建筑进行了多种分类,但本文认为最有价值并予以采用的是“程序性违法建筑”与“实质性违法建筑”之分类,该分类主要根据能否补正而划分的,其中“实质性违法建筑”是本文主要研究对象。在对违法建筑之上所存在基本问题进行界定后,本文从《物权法》第五条、第九条和第三十条入手,对权利设定、初始权利取得及“违法建造”进行了探究与讨论,从而确定了其上是存在所有权的,能够基于“违法建造”行为而取得所有权。违法建筑之上所有权的存在并未对《物权法》之规定“越雷池一步”,其初始权利的产生与取得理应受到学界与实务界的认可。无论房屋建造行为合法与非法,建造人均应基于建造事实行为而取得建筑之所有权,即使不能取得登记资格,其所有权的取得也不会因《物权法》第九条之规定而受到影响。在《物权法》第三十条规定中,不仅“合法建造”能够引起物权变动效力,其他“事实行为”也能够引起物权变动效力,故“违法建造”作为事实行为也完全可以使建造人取得所有权。通过对现行《物权法》之规定的研究,可以发现其上存在所有权是受到法律认可的,故“违法建筑之上存在所有权”无疑是对我国现行法律的“正确解读”。当其上所存在的民事权利得到明确后,如何对其进行处分与保护自然也就成为需要研究的对象。本文以《合同法》第五十二条第(四)、(五)项为依据对处分违法建筑的债权合同效力进行研究,从而发现除个别情况外,处分违法建筑的债权合同的效力应当无疑是有效的。然而处分违法建筑的债权合同虽然有效,但并不意味着违法建筑的处分必然有效,违法建筑的处分并不能导致物权变动,虽然我国台湾地区判例已存在“事实上处分权”之概念来应对该情况,但其不仅在设立之初便有不足,而且在实务操作中亦存缺陷,在台湾地区受到诸多学者的质疑与批评,应该予以摒弃,违法建筑的处分并不会导致继受者取得违法建筑的“事实上处分权”。因此,对其所进行的处分只能以其使用与收益之权能为基础,无法实现物权变动之效果。建造人通过建造这一事实行为取得所有权后,可以对该违法建筑进行事实上的利用并进行不产生物权变动之处分,如租赁、借用等。违法建筑既然能够存在所有权,那么其理应获得私法上的保护与救济。本文从物权法之救济和侵权法之救济两个方面对违法建筑的保护进行阐释,明确了违法建筑能够获得私法上的救济。当违法建筑受到侵害时,其权利人可以通过行使相应的物权请求权来寻求《物权法》对违法建筑的保护。但由于违法建筑具有“先天违法性”,而受到的保护力度相应减弱或受限,如“实质性违法建筑”的权利人不能行使恢复原状请求权。同时违法建筑在《侵权法》上也具有可诉性,法院有职责对公民、法人及其他组织的行为及其所取得财产的合法性进行审查与确认,行使案件之审理权。当事人的财物受到损害时,无论该财产是否合法,其在客观上已经出现了财产的损失。无论财物来源合法与否,其均享有受到保护之权利,亦如“盗窃之盗窃之物,亦属盗窃”一般。违法建筑本身所蕴含权利的保护是不容忽视的,侵害违法建筑的行为人并不能因侵害对象属于违法之财物而免于承担起侵权赔偿的民事责任。“违法建筑之上存在所有权”是对我国现行法的解释而产生的应然结果,并非是对立法构建的理论设想。为了更好实现正确对待违法建筑上民事权利的目的,笔者建议采用“包裹立法”的技术,删除我国现行法律体系中的“合法建筑受法律保护”等近似表述中的“合法”两字,避免过于强调受法律保护之客体的“合法性”,避免致使司法者对我国法律体系的价值取向产生误解。本文认为,我国司法对违法建筑的私法地位的承认并不会造成违法建筑泛滥之情况的出现,也不会阻碍我国对其所进行的行政管理与监督。与此相反,正确地认识并公平地对待违法建筑之上的民事权利,才能够让行政执法机关的管理与监督职能得到更好的发挥与落实,明确其执法之重心不仅在违法建筑本身之上,而更应聚焦在建造人的违法建造行为之上。
[Abstract]:Since the last century since 80s, caused by illegal construction problems have become increasingly prominent, the state-owned enterprises in Hunan illegally built "Nanjing incident", the history of the most luxurious illegally built "," Humen illegal incident "," Wuhan illegal incident "," Guangdong incident, "illegally built" illegally built "Sanya Lake incident" event, "Xinyang illegally built illegally built" the event "and many other illegal construction problems continue to be disclosed by the media. The increasingly serious problem of illegal construction Ancient Chinese Literature Search caught my attention, and gradually become a hot research topic in academic circles. The governance of illegal construction, prevention, punishment, in-depth research on Expropriation and compensation and other public issues are but of private law the study only in recent years began to receive more attention, the ownership of private law issues such as illegal construction are subject to academic research and discussion, but the results are not ideal, still need more deep In the study. At the same time, with China's urbanization process is accelerating, residents of the housing pressure increasing, illegal construction also showed accelerated growth trend in the number and kind of private law, the issue of illegal construction on the increasingly sharp, solve this problem has reached a critical state. Although at the moment China's current law system, the illegal construction of standard provisions are many, but the trail in the private law system of China's current is hard to find a provision, such legislation is difficult to effectively solve the problem of the private law. And this kind of heavy public and legislative status of light private "affects the value orientation Study on the theory and the judicial practice in China," power "and light" rights "has become a common problem of contemporary law treatment of illegal construction. This is undoubtedly contrary to the rule of law, is to Ping Zhengyi. The deviation is the need to be corrected. In this situation, the illegal construction of private law issues this thesis to explore and strive to private law issues of illegal construction carried out detailed research and discussion. The definition of illegal construction, to define the types and related legal issues and study its basic properties. After combing with the Research on China's legislation background and history can be found, the former "illegal construction" is based on the current legislation and produce, but with the improvement of legislation, the category already belongs to the current "illegal construction". At the same time, regardless of the legal or illegal buildings, the building materials have lost mobility. The physical attribute and legal attribute has changed, connected to each other together become an objective and legal real estate. Although the illegal construction involves many private. Questions, but it still belongs to the "public law" concept, its definition should be based on public law. Therefore, the illegal building refers to the relevant government departments without a license or not in accordance with the provisions of the license case and unauthorized construction and over license, approved period and continue to use the buildings, structures and other facilities, and in violation of our laws, regulations, rules and regulations. In order to study the result of illegal construction better, practitioners and scholars carried out a variety of classification of the building, but this article holds that the classification of the most valuable and be used "procedural illegal construction" and "substantive illegal construction", the classification is mainly based on can the compensation division, the essence of "illegal construction" is the main research object in this thesis. The definition of fundamental problems of illegal buildings above, this article from the "property law > fifth, ninth and thirtieth Starting on the right to set, and get the initial right "illegal construction" was explored and discussed, so as to determine the existence of ownership, can be based on the "illegal construction" and made the illegal construction ownership. Ownership did not exist on the "property law > provisions overstepped its. The initial right generation and has deserved academics and practical recognition. Both legal and illegal behavior of housing construction, the construction of the building construction should be made per capita ownership behavior based on the facts, even if not obtain the registration qualification, the ownership of the property law will not result in < > ninth of the affected." property law > thirtieth stipulates, "the legal construction" not only can cause the change of real right effect, other "facts behavior" can also cause the change of real right effect, so the "illegal construction" as it shall Can make the building ownership. Through the study of the current "property law > provisions, can be found on the existence of ownership is recognized by law, so the" illegal construction on existing ownership "is undoubtedly the current law of our country's" correct interpretation. "When the existing civil rights on the clear after how to dispose of its natural and protection has become the object to be studied. In this paper," contract law "article fifty-second (four), (five) on the basis of a punishment of illegal construction contract research, which found that in addition to individual cases, the effectiveness of punishment of illegal construction contract shall be is effective. However, punishment of illegal construction contract although effective, but it does not mean that the illegal construction of illegal construction of the inevitable punishment, punishment and property changes to, although China's Taiwan In case there has been "in fact right" to deal with the situation, but it is not only at the beginning of the establishment is insufficient, but also defects in practice, questioned and criticized by many scholars in the Taiwan area, should be abandoned, the illegal construction of the punishment will not lead to illegal successors the construction of "the fact right". Therefore, the punishment only in its use and benefits of power as the foundation, can not achieve the effect of real right change. People built by building the fact behavior of ownership, can the illegal construction by the fact and no punishment, right changes such as leasing, borrowing. Since the illegal construction ownership can exist, so it should be protected by private law and handouts from the relief of property law and tort law in the two aspects of the law To explain the construction of protection, clear the illegal construction to obtain the relief of private law. When the illegal construction is infringed, the right holder may seek to "property law > the protection of the illegal construction through the exercise of the corresponding property claim. But due to illegal construction has the" innate illegality ", and protection by the reduced or restricted, such as the essence of" illegal construction "of human rights cannot be exercised restitution claim. At the same time the illegal construction in" tort law > also be actionable, the court has responsibility for citizens, examine and determine the validity of the legal persons and other organizations of the behavior and made the property of the exercise of cases jurisdiction. Party's property damage, whether the property is legitimate, it has appeared the loss of property objectively. Whether property source is legal or not, it has protected the rights, as well as "The theft is theft, theft". The protection of illegal construction of inherent rights can not be ignored, against illegal construction behavior and not because of violating the object belongs to the illegal property and from civil liability assume tort compensation. "The right result of illegal buildings above the ownership of our country the current interpretation of law and not on theoretical assumptions. In order to correctly treat the legislative construction of civil rights on the illegal construction to achieve better purpose, I suggest the" legislative package ", delete the legal system in our country's current law" legal buildings protected by law "and other similar in the expression of" legal "the word, to avoid too much emphasis on the legal protection of the object of" legitimacy ", avoid the judicial value orientation of China's legal system of misunderstanding. This paper argues that China's judicial illegally Law building private law status recognition and will not cause flooding of illegal buildings, will not hinder our country on the administration and supervision of the conducted. On the contrary, the correct understanding and fair treatment of illegal construction on civil rights, to make administrative enforcement management organs and supervision by play with the implementation of better, clear the law enforcement focus not only on the illegal building itself, but should be more focused on the construction of the illegal construction behavior.

【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923.2

【共引文献】