担保型买卖合同法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-09 22:28

本文选题：担保型买卖合同　切入点：非典型性担保合同　出处：《扬州大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：在当前司法环境中,当事人双方为了给借贷合同提供担保而订立买卖合同(一般为不动产买卖合同)的情形屡见不鲜。具体来说就是:双方当事人签订借款合同,同时约定,在借款人不能如期归还借款时,需要继续履行买卖合同。界定该类合同性质、明确该类合同效力以及确定该类合同项下当事人之间权利义务关系,是解决该类问题的关键所在。对担保型买卖合同中性质、有效性等法律问题进行分析和梳理,是保障当事人间订立合同效力,及这一新兴企业融资担保途径有效开展的必要前提。本文通过探究担保型买卖合同本质属性,得出结论,该类合同是一种非典型担保物权。该类担保物权是从我国特色的经济及法律背景下衍生出的。同时该类非典型物权不与物权法定原则相冲突,双方当事人根据自愿原则所订立的合同也不因违反通谋虚伪而无效。本文将从以下四部分对担保性买卖合同问题进行分析:第一部分:提出问题。通过对比“朱俊芳与陕西嘉和泰房地产公司商品房买卖合同纠纷案”与“俞伯良、李银峰与嘉善房地产公司商品房买卖合同纠纷案”在审判实践中不同的审判路径,得出在司法实践中该类问题如何定性、效力如何,审判实务中存在哪些分歧。同时《民间借贷司法解释》第24条对担保型买卖合同作出了明确的规定,但并不能消除争议。其所明确的是:“以签订买卖合同作为民间借贷的合同,应当按照民间借贷法律关系审理”,对于标的物所有权转移的情形并未指明裁判规则。从而对该类合同项下,买卖合同究竟承担怎样角色,在司法实践中缺少统一路径。然而在“担保型买卖合同”中,相比借款合同,对买卖合同的处理更具有复杂性。第二部分:担保型买卖合同性质的研究。担保型买卖合同的性质争议颇多,主要有:担保型买卖合同是不动产抵押合同、担保型买卖合同是典型性担保合同等。本部分将担保型买卖合同与其他相类似合同对比,分析异同,得出担保型买卖合同是非典型物权合同。第三部分:担保型买卖合同效力分析。担保型买卖合同效力说有有效说和无效说两种。造成以上争议主要在于如何界定合同流质条款性质,担保型买卖合同是否因流质而无效,同时担保型买卖合同作为一种非典型物权合同,是否因违反物权法定而无效。第四部分:对担保型买卖合同中所中涉及具体法律问题进行辨析。主要是对该类合同中担保权人、担保权设定人及第三人权利、义务进行分析。试提出在同时做到保护权利人、义务人、第三人情况下,该类合同合理的处理思路。
[Abstract]:In the current judicial environment, it is common for both parties to conclude a contract of sale (usually a contract for the sale of real estate) in order to provide security for a loan contract.Specifically, the parties sign a loan contract and agree that if the borrower fails to repay the loan on time, he shall continue to perform the contract of sale and purchase.Defining the nature of this kind of contract, clarifying the validity of the contract and determining the relationship between the rights and obligations of the parties under this kind of contract are the key to solve this kind of problem.Analyzing and combing the legal problems such as the nature and validity of the guaranteed sale contract is the necessary premise to guarantee the validity of the conclusion of the contract between the parties and the effective development of the financing guarantee way of this new enterprise.By exploring the essential attribute of the guaranteed sale contract, this paper draws the conclusion that this kind of contract is a kind of atypical security real right.This kind of security interest is derived from the economic and legal background with Chinese characteristics.At the same time, this kind of atypical real right does not conflict with the principle of property law, and the contract concluded by both parties according to the voluntary principle is not invalid for violating collusion hypocrisy.This paper will analyze the secured sale contract from the following four parts: the first part: put forward the question.By comparing "the dispute case between Zhu Junfang and Shaanxi Jiahe Tai Real Estate Company" and "the dispute case between Yu Boliang, Li Yinfeng and Jiashan Real Estate Company" in the trial practice,In the judicial practice, how to determine the nature of this kind of issues, how to effect, what differences exist in judicial practice.At the same time, Article 24 of the Judicial interpretation of Folk Lending makes a clear stipulation on the secured sale contract, but it can not eliminate the dispute.What is clear is that: "the contract to sign a contract of sale and purchase as a private loan should be tried according to the legal relationship of folk lending", and there is no rule of adjudication for the transfer of title to the subject matter.Therefore, under this kind of contract, what kind of role does the sale contract assume, lacks the unified path in the judicial practice.However, the handling of the sale contract is more complicated than that of the loan contract.The second part: the research of the nature of the guaranteed sale contract.There are a lot of disputes about the nature of guarantee sale contract, such as: guarantee sale contract is immovable property mortgage contract, guarantee sale contract is typical guarantee contract, etc.This part compares the secured sale contract with other similar contracts, analyzes the similarities and differences, and draws the conclusion that the secured sale contract is an atypical real right contract.The third part: the analysis of the validity of the guaranteed sale contract.There are two kinds of the theory of validity and invalidity of the guarantee contract of sale and purchase.The above disputes mainly lie in how to define the nature of the liquid clause of the contract, whether the guarantee sale contract is invalid because of the fluid property, and whether the guarantee sale contract, as a kind of atypical real right contract, is invalid because of the violation of the property law.The fourth part: analyze the specific legal problems involved in the secured sale contract.It mainly analyzes the rights and obligations of the security owner, the originator of the security right and the third party in this kind of contract.In the case of protecting the obligee, obligor and third party at the same time, this kind of contract should be dealt with reasonably.
【学位授予单位】：扬州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.6

【相似文献】