物权变动模式比较研究
发布时间：2018-11-25 22:27
【摘要】：就形式立法而言,可以说到2010年底包括民法体系在内的我国特色社会主义法律体系已经形成,但从学术成熟以及理论与实践相契合的角度来看,包括物权变动模式相关立法在内的我国民事法律体系却难称完善。为避免我国1999年《合同法》第51条将处分权界定于债权行为阶段所导致的法律适用混乱局面,按照反面解释,最高人民法院已在2012年通过《关于审理买卖合同纠纷案件适用法律问题的解释》第3条维护无权处分合同的效力。这也就意味着不再要求卖方在债权行为阶段对标的物具有处分权,实质上也就将处分权还原为物权变动阶段的权利,即肯定物权变动阶段存在独立的单方意思表示。然而,该解释在内容上却与我国立法者和主流学者关于债权形式主义的传统认知相冲突,并最终导致了我国物权变动模式选择两难处境的出现。 为深入论证上述观点并探讨我国物权变动模式的立法选择问题,除引言与结论之外,主体由6章构成。引言部分,在引出论题之后,阐明了所采取的主要研究方法和主要观点。第1章对物权变动模式的内涵加以明确,并对作为物权变动模式划分基础的物权行为理论进行分析；第2-3章在综合比较两大法系几种物权变动模式的确立过程和时代背景之后,分别对区分原则和抽象原则进行合理性辨析,从准据法适用角度上初步得出荷韩模式最具合理性；第4章从我国物权变动模式选择立场出发,以国际贸易适用为视野,对物权变动模式进行由经济学的博弈论到处分权性质界定再到立法模式选择的全方位考察,所得结论也同样支持上述观点；第5-6章在具体探讨我国现阶段物权变动模式两难处境的现状、成因、本质等方面之后,尝试通过运用非形式逻辑方法理性地建构实践论辩平台,结合社会学的经验方法,以期推动走出两难处境,并得出我国物权变动模式相对合理的选择是以荷韩模式为代表的债权形式主义的结论。
[Abstract]:In terms of formal legislation, it can be said that by the end of 2010, the socialist legal system with Chinese characteristics, including the civil law system, had been formed, but from the point of view of academic maturity and the coincidence of theory and practice, However, China's civil law system, including legislation related to the mode of real right change, is difficult to be perfected. In order to avoid the confusion of the application of law caused by Article 51 of the contract Law of 1999, which defines the disposition right in the stage of creditor's rights, it is interpreted in the opposite way. In 2012, the Supreme people's Court adopted Article 3 of the interpretation on the legal issues applicable to hearing disputes relating to Sale and purchase contracts, which upholds the validity of the contract of unauthorized disposition. This means that the seller is no longer required to dispose of the subject matter in the act of creditor's rights stage, and in essence, the disposition right is restored to the right of real right change stage, that is to say, the independent unilateral expression of will exists in the stage of property right change. However, the interpretation conflicts with the traditional cognition of creditor's rights formalism by Chinese legislators and mainstream scholars, and finally leads to the dilemma of the choice of the mode of real right change in our country. In order to demonstrate the above views and discuss the legislative choice of the mode of real right change in our country, the main body consists of six chapters except the introduction and conclusion. In the introduction part, after introducing the topic, the main research methods and main viewpoints are expounded. In the first chapter, the connotation of the mode of real right change is clarified, and the theory of act of real right, which is the basis of dividing the mode of real right change, is analyzed. Chapter 2-3, after synthetically comparing the establishment process and background of several real right change modes in two legal systems, analyzes the rationality of distinction principle and abstract principle respectively. From the perspective of applicable law, it is concluded that the Korean model is the most reasonable. In chapter 4, from the standpoint of the mode choice of real right change in our country, taking the application of international trade as the visual field, the author studies the mode of real right change from the game theory of economics to the definition of disposition right and then to the choice of legislative mode. The conclusions also support this view; Chapter 5-6, after discussing the dilemma of the mode of real right change in our country at present, attempts to construct the practical debate platform rationally by using the method of non-formal logic, combining with the empirical method of sociology. In order to push out of the dilemma, we can draw the conclusion that the reasonable choice of the mode of real right change in our country is the formalism of creditor's rights represented by the model of Holland and Korea.
【学位授予单位】：大连海事大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D913
本文编号：2357550
[Abstract]:In terms of formal legislation, it can be said that by the end of 2010, the socialist legal system with Chinese characteristics, including the civil law system, had been formed, but from the point of view of academic maturity and the coincidence of theory and practice, However, China's civil law system, including legislation related to the mode of real right change, is difficult to be perfected. In order to avoid the confusion of the application of law caused by Article 51 of the contract Law of 1999, which defines the disposition right in the stage of creditor's rights, it is interpreted in the opposite way. In 2012, the Supreme people's Court adopted Article 3 of the interpretation on the legal issues applicable to hearing disputes relating to Sale and purchase contracts, which upholds the validity of the contract of unauthorized disposition. This means that the seller is no longer required to dispose of the subject matter in the act of creditor's rights stage, and in essence, the disposition right is restored to the right of real right change stage, that is to say, the independent unilateral expression of will exists in the stage of property right change. However, the interpretation conflicts with the traditional cognition of creditor's rights formalism by Chinese legislators and mainstream scholars, and finally leads to the dilemma of the choice of the mode of real right change in our country. In order to demonstrate the above views and discuss the legislative choice of the mode of real right change in our country, the main body consists of six chapters except the introduction and conclusion. In the introduction part, after introducing the topic, the main research methods and main viewpoints are expounded. In the first chapter, the connotation of the mode of real right change is clarified, and the theory of act of real right, which is the basis of dividing the mode of real right change, is analyzed. Chapter 2-3, after synthetically comparing the establishment process and background of several real right change modes in two legal systems, analyzes the rationality of distinction principle and abstract principle respectively. From the perspective of applicable law, it is concluded that the Korean model is the most reasonable. In chapter 4, from the standpoint of the mode choice of real right change in our country, taking the application of international trade as the visual field, the author studies the mode of real right change from the game theory of economics to the definition of disposition right and then to the choice of legislative mode. The conclusions also support this view; Chapter 5-6, after discussing the dilemma of the mode of real right change in our country at present, attempts to construct the practical debate platform rationally by using the method of non-formal logic, combining with the empirical method of sociology. In order to push out of the dilemma, we can draw the conclusion that the reasonable choice of the mode of real right change in our country is the formalism of creditor's rights represented by the model of Holland and Korea.
【学位授予单位】：大连海事大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D913
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 娄爱华;;论善意取得制度中的转让合同效力问题——兼谈《合同法》第51条与《物权法》第106条之关系[J];法律科学(西北政法大学学报);2011年01期
2 张玉卿;;《联合国国际货物销售合同公约》的适用与解释[J];国际经济法学刊;2007年03期
3 朱芝弘;;韩国民法的继承与创造[J];甘肃社会科学;2008年03期
4 周后春;;论物权变动模式的选择对国际私法立法的影响[J];广州大学学报(社会科学版);2006年05期
5 许璐;;论意思自治于动产物权法律适用中的限制[J];研究生法学;2013年03期
6 王利民;王俊峰;;我国物权变动模式的两难处境及相关思考[J];大连理工大学学报(社会科学版);2014年03期
7 曹燕飞;;论物权法的发展对国际私法的影响[J];今日南国(理论创新版);2008年04期
8 崔建远;无权处分辨——合同法第51条规定的解释与适用[J];法学研究;2003年01期
9 孙宪忠;;我国物权法中物权变动规则的法理评述[J];法学研究;2008年03期
10 周后春;;新物权法中的区分原则对国际私法立法的影响[J];兰州学刊;2007年12期
相关博士学位论文 前1条
1 李军;无权处分合同效力与物权变动模式之关联[D];中国政法大学;2011年
，本文编号：2357550
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/hetongqiyue/2357550.html
