马琨诉王利华集资房买卖纠纷案分析

发布时间：2018-05-25 02:25

本文选题：单位集资房 + 合同无效　；参考：《兰州大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：单位集资房作为经济适用房的一种类型是我国体制改革过渡期间的一种特殊产物。随着《经济适用住房管理办法》中“任何单位不得利用新征用或新购买土地组织集资合作建房,各级国家机关一律不得搞单位集资合作建房”这一规定的实施,我国已经从政策层面叫停了单位集资房,但是单位集资房所遗留的问题仍然存在,这其中由于对单位集资房指标转让而引发的法律纠纷就在各地时有发生。并且相同的案件,在各级法院的判决下往往得到不同的判决结果,使得在司法实践中,在如何去认定集资房指标转让合同效力的问题上产生了诸多争议和分歧,因此如何去判定此类合同的效力,就显得尤为重要,值得我们去进一步的探讨和分析。本文由一起发生在甘肃省的单位集资房转让纠纷案例入手,首先简述一、二审法院和再审法院对本案的审理结果和判决结果,通过对案件争议焦点和此类案件法律分歧点的梳理,对本类案件进行法律分析,着重对单位集资房指标转让合同标的确认和单位集资房指标转让合同效力的确认两个方面进行分析,进而确定如何分析认定此类合同的效力。对本案合同效力认定上的争议以及在实际审判中出现的同案不同判的现象来看,我国《合同法》第52条第5项及其解释虽本着尊重当事人意思表示、鼓励交易的态度,对无效合同范围层层缩减,但实际上其对司法实践中判定违法合同的效力的实际指导意义却是十分有限的,本文将对此进行分析,提出应将违法合同效力判断归于损害公共利益的范畴之下,通过比例原则指导下的利益衡量方法来对违法合同效力的最终结果进行判定,对其在提高司法实践中的可行性进行探讨。
[Abstract]:As a type of comfortable housing, unit-funded housing is a special product during the transitional period of China's system reform. With the implementation of the provisions of the "measures for the Administration of affordable Housing", "no unit may use new requisition or new land purchase organizations to raise funds to build houses, and all state organs at all levels shall not engage in joint housing construction with units," Our country has stopped the unit financing house from the policy level, but the problem left by the unit collection house still exists, among them, the legal dispute caused by the transfer of the unit financing house index occurs from time to time in various places. And the same cases, under the judgments of the courts at all levels, often get different results. In judicial practice, there are many disputes and differences on how to determine the validity of the contract of transfer of the capital raising housing indicators. Therefore, how to judge the effectiveness of such contracts, it is particularly important, worthy of further discussion and analysis. This article begins with a case of a dispute over the transfer of a unit's capital house in Gansu Province. First, the second instance court and the retrial court will give a brief account of the results of the trial and the judgment made by the court of second instance and the court of retrial. Through combing the focus of the case dispute and the legal division of this kind of cases, the legal analysis of this kind of cases is carried out. This paper focuses on the analysis of the confirmation of the target transfer contract and the validity of the transfer contract of the unit financing house index, and then determines how to analyze and identify the effectiveness of this kind of contract. From the point of view of the dispute over the validity of the contract in this case and the phenomenon of different judgments of the co-cases in the actual trial, although item 5 of Article 52 of the contract Law of China and its interpretation are based on the attitude of respecting the intention of the parties and encouraging the transaction, The scope of invalid contract is reduced layer by layer, but in fact, it is of limited practical significance to judge the effectiveness of illegal contract in judicial practice. It is proposed that the judgment of the effectiveness of illegal contracts should be classified into the category of harming the public interest, and the final result of the effectiveness of illegal contracts should be judged by the method of interest measurement under the guidance of the principle of proportionality. The feasibility of improving judicial practice is discussed.
【学位授予单位】：兰州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D920.5;D923.6

【参考文献】