效力区分原则理论基础及适用

发布时间：2018-06-17 17:11

本文选题：区分原则 + 效力区分原则　；参考：《郑州大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：对作为物权法基本原则之一的区分原则的内涵、理论基础及其实践意义的研究有助于研究如何适用效力区分原则。区分原则在物权变动的过程中发挥着重要的作用,它在一定程度上会影响到物权法的体系,故研究该原则也会加深对与其有关的制度的理解。效力区分原则中的“区分”指的是区分物权变动的原因与结果,使两者的法律效力不同。适用该原则能对第三人的利益、非违约方利益及交易安全有效的保护,对形成有机统一的民法财产法体系有积极的促进作用。目前我国《物权法》对效力区分原则的规定过于简单,并且是原则性的规定,面对纷繁复杂的现实生活显得有些苍白无力。研究效力区分原则离不开对物权行为理论的研究,关于物权行为理论的继受问题,从接触到这一学说开始我国学界就争论不断,支持者和反对者的论战一直很激烈。效力区分原则不承认物权行为的独立存在,但是参考了物权行为理论中的区分原则。本文的研究角度是对我国物权法、合同法、担保法等相关的法律法规及司法解释综合分析,细致论证,结合学者的争论观点研究效力区分原则的理论基础及适用。在文章的写作过程中运用了概念分析研究法、实证分析研究法和比较分析研究法。文章的主体部分共分为三个部分。第一部分探讨效力区分原则理论基础。区分合同效力和物权变动效力,区分物权变动的原因行为和结果行为,这两个区分构成了效力区分原则的内涵。物权行为理论中的区分原则是研究效力区分原则的基础。本部分首先论述了区分原则和效力区分原则的关系,继而对物权行为理论的争议进行了分析,最后得出区分支配权和请求权以及区分负担行为和处分行为这两点是效力区分原则的理论基础。第二部分论述效力区分原则下的无权处分和善意取得制度,物权变动模式的选择不同对无权处分和善意取得的效力会产生不同的影响。目前世界上有意思主义、形式主义、交付主义、意思主义与形式主义相交错的四种物权变动模式。我国的物权变动模式以债权形式主义为主,此外还含有其他模式。经过研究得出效力区分原则在实践中有相当重要的价值。其与无权处分、善意取得等制度有机统一后可以有效的维护第三人利益,保护交易安全。第三部分论述了效力区分原则在我国动产物权变动、不动产物权变动及担保物权变动中的体现,将该原则广泛运用于民商事审判实践中是正确的选择,人民法院在审理有关不动产物权转让合同纠纷案件的过程中,应当依据《物权法》第15条的规定,结合效力区分原则,依法正确认定有关不动产物权转让合同的效力。
[Abstract]:The study of the connotation, theoretical basis and practical significance of the principle of distinction as one of the basic principles of property law is helpful to study how to apply the principle of distinction of effect. The principle of distinction plays an important role in the process of real right change. To a certain extent, it will affect the system of property law, so the study of this principle will also deepen the understanding of the system related to it. The distinction in the principle of distinction of effect refers to the reason and result of distinguishing the change of real right, which makes their legal effect different. The application of this principle can protect the interests of the third party, the interests of the non-defaulting party and the transaction safely and effectively, and play an active role in promoting the formation of an organic unified civil law system of property law. At present, the stipulation of the principle of differentiating effectiveness is too simple, and it is a rule of principle, facing the complicated and complicated real life, it is a little pale and powerless. The study of the principle of the distinction of effect can not be separated from the study of the theory of the act of real right. From the contact to this theory, the debate between the supporters and the opponents has been fierce. The principle of distinction of effect does not recognize the independent existence of act of real right, but it refers to the principle of distinction in the theory of act of real right. The research angle of this paper is a comprehensive analysis of the relevant laws and regulations and judicial interpretation of China's real right law, contract law, security law and so on, and a detailed demonstration, as well as the theoretical basis and application of the principle of differentiation of effectiveness in the light of scholars' controversial views. Conceptual analysis, empirical analysis and comparative analysis are used in the process of writing. The main body of the article is divided into three parts. The first part discusses the theoretical basis of the principle of differentiation of effectiveness. It distinguishes the effect of contract from the effect of change of real right, the cause act and result act of the change of real right, which constitute the connotation of the principle of differentiating effect. The principle of distinction in the theory of juristic act of real right is the basis of studying the principle of distinction of effect. This part firstly discusses the relationship between the principle of distinction and the principle of distinction of effect, and then analyzes the controversy of the theory of juristic act of real right. Finally, it is concluded that the distinction between dominant right and claim right, as well as between burden act and disposition act, are the theoretical basis of the principle of distinguishing validity. The second part discusses the system of unauthorized disposition and bona fide acquisition under the principle of distinction of effect. Different modes of real right change have different effects on the effectiveness of unauthorized disposition and bona fide acquisition. At present, there are four modes of real right change in the world, which are interesting doctrine, formalism, delivery doctrine, will doctrine and formalism. The mode of real right change in our country is mainly creditor's right formalism, in addition, it also contains other models. Through the study, it is concluded that the principle of force differentiation is of great value in practice. It can effectively safeguard the interests of the third party and protect the transaction security after the organic unification of the system such as unauthorized disposition, bona fide acquisition and so on. The third part discusses the principle of the differentiation of effectiveness in the change of real property of movable property, real property and security of real right change, the principle is widely used in civil and commercial trial practice is the correct choice. The people's court should correctly determine the validity of the contract of transfer of real property right according to the provisions of Article 15 of the Real right Law and the principle of discrimination of effectiveness in the course of hearing the dispute cases concerning the contract of transfer of real property right.
【学位授予单位】：郑州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.2

【参考文献】