无权处分的规制形式——以《合同法》第51条的解释为中心

发布时间：2019-03-12 16:51

【摘要】：如何理解《合同法》第 5 1条 ,是合同法颁行后民法学界讨论最多的问题之一。学者之间的不同见解乃因所持解释前设不同 ,即对无权处分制度是通过债权行为 ,还是通过物权行为进行规制有不同立场。通过利益调和功能的比较 ,以及债权行为无效导致法律体系解释困境的说明 ,可以认为无论债权行为规制形式的具体方案如何设计都难以达成妥当结果。债权行为不因欠缺处分权而确定有效不会过度保护买受人 ,能够达成最佳制度效果。因而 ,物权行为规制形式具有合理性。鉴于我国现行法并不认可处分行为独立性 ,所以不宜认为无权处分行为包括债权行为的履行行为。在我国现行法背景下《合同法》第 5 1条仅调整无需履行而直接发生权利变动效果的合同关系 ,具体类型主要为一般动产抵押合同与质押合同 ,适用机会极其有限。
[Abstract]:How to understand the Contract Law> Article 51 is one of the most important issues in the discussion of the civil law after the award of the contract law. The different opinions between the scholars are different from their interpretation, that is, the right to dispose of the system is through the behavior of the creditor's right or through the regulation of the real right act. Through the comparison of the function of interest and the failure of the creditor's right to explain the dilemma of the legal system, it can be concluded that it is difficult to achieve the proper result in the design of the specific scheme in the form of the regulation of the creditor's rights. The behavior of the creditor's rights is not determined to be over-protected by the lack of the right of separation, and the best system effect can be achieved. Therefore, the regulation form of real right act is reasonable. In view of the fact that the current law of our country does not recognize the independence of the disposition act, it is not appropriate to think that the right to dispose of the act includes the performance of the behavior of the creditor's rights. Under the background of the current law of our country, the Contract Law> Article 51 only adjusts the contract relation of the right change effect without performing the performance, the specific type mainly refers to the general movable property mortgage contract and the pledge contract, and the application opportunity is extremely limited.
【作者单位】：西南民族学院法学系
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】