特殊动产物权变动研究

发布时间：2018-04-14 16:04

本文选题：特殊动产 + 物权变动　；参考：《新疆大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：《物权法》第24条规定特殊动产未经登记,不得对抗善意第三人。但是由于此法条作为不完整法条仅规定登记的对抗效力,并没有明确其生效要件,引起学者纷纷著书立说,对该类标的物的生效要件和登记的效力展开讨论。主要有“合意生效+登记对抗”、“交付生效+登记对抗”、“交付生效+登记生效”学说。《买卖合同司法解释》第10条规定在一物数卖的情况下:交付优先、登记优先、合同成立在前优先的规则,解决了一般情况下该类标的物的一物数卖所有权的判断问题,但是对于该类标的物一物数卖情况下登记在前、交付在后以及观念交付下双重交付问题并没有规定。《物权法司法解释(一)》第六条规定,在买受人支付了对价并取得占有的情况下,转让人的债权人不属于善意第三人的范畴。但是此规则并没有达到立法者的预期目的,而且与现有的司法解释和法律规定相矛盾。本文除引言外,分为三部分。第一部分主要是特殊动产的物权变动规则概述。《物权法》第24条并没有使用“特殊动产”这一概念,在其出台后,学者们有的将这类动产表述为“注册动产”,有的将其称为“准不动产”,《买卖合同司法解释》第十条出台后才将这类动产定义为特殊动产。对机动车、航空器、船舶的物权变动进行特殊规定,并不是我们国家所独有的,我国是在借鉴别的国家的基础上进行规定的。因此,本章介绍了其他国家对此类动产的规定。该类标的物的物权变动规则究竟为何,学者对此有不同的观点,包括“合意生效+登记对抗”、“交付生效+登记对抗”以及“交付生效+登记生效”。笔者对各个学说的支撑点进行了阐述并对其进行分析。第二部分重点分析了该规则所存在的问题。《买卖合同司法解释》第十条对该类标的物的一物数卖问题进行了基本规定。但是其第十条第4项颇具争议,笔者对此进行了分析,认为其并没有对登记在先、交付在后的情形进行规定。该类标的物一物数卖还存在的一个问题是观念交付下,双重交付的所有权确认问题,《买卖合同司法解释》第10条也没有对其进行规定。《物权法司法解释(一)》第六条是对善意第三人的范围进行规制,对《物权法》第24条内容的补充,但是由于其与《买卖合同司法解释》所存在的逻辑错误,并没有取得预期的效果。该规则的重要一点就是确定善意第三人的范围,但是我国现有的法律规定并没有给予明确,这就会造成司法实践的难题。第三部分主要内容是分析该规则问题产生的原因和完善的方案。其产生的原因是由于其与一般动产不同的公示制度,不仅包括交付还包括登记,但是却赋予二者不同的效力,使行为人难以判断真实的权利状态。在对特殊动产物权变动规则的完善方案上,笔者提出了将登记纳入该类标的物善意取得的判断标准,在观念交付的双重交付下适用善意取得制度,《物权法司法解释(一)》第六条中“支付对价”要素删除以及善意第三人的范围仅指已经登记的抵押权的建议。
[Abstract]:"Property law > twenty-fourth stipulates special chattel without registration shall not challenge any bona fide third party. But because of this article as incomplete law only stipulates the registration confrontation effect, and there is no clear of the effective elements caused by scholars, the subject matter of the effectiveness and the efficiency of registration is discussed. There are" desirable effect + registration confrontation "," delivered the commencement + registration confrontation "," delivered the commencement + registration "theory. The contract for the sale of judicial interpretation > tenth provisions in a number of cases sold: delivery priority, priority registration, the contract is established in the rules of priority, solves the problem of the number of judges a matter of this kind of subject generally sell ownership, but for this kind of object a number of cases registered in selling before delivery after the concept delivery and double delivery problem does not require the law of judicial interpretation (a. >) the provisions of article sixth, the buyer pays the price and obtained possession of the case, the assignor's creditors do not belong to the category of the third person in good faith. But this rule does not achieve the desired purpose of legislators, and the existing legal provisions and judicial interpretation and contradiction. In addition to this introduction, is divided into the three part. The first part is the special property right change in the rule. Property Law > twenty-fourth did not use the concept of "special real estate" in the introduction, some scholars of this type of real estate is described as "real estate registration", some called the "quasi real estate" < > tenth of the contract for the sale of judicial interpretation after the introduction of this kind of real estate will be defined as special movables. For motor vehicles, aircraft, ship alteration of property special provisions, is not unique to our country, our country is based on the provisions of borrowing from the national. Therefore, this chapter introduces the other countries on such real estate regulations. What is the subject matter of the rules of property change, scholars have different views, including the "consensus effect + registration confrontation", "delivered the commencement + registration confrontation" and "delivered the commencement + registration". Elaborates on various the supporting point of the theory and carries on the analysis. The second part focuses on the analysis of the existing problems. The rules of judicial interpretation of a contract for the sale of the number > tenth of the subject matter of selling basic provisions of article tenth. But the fourth controversial, the author analyzes that it does not have to register first, to carry out the provisions in the situation after the delivery. The subject matter of a number of selling a problem still exists is the concept of delivery, delivery confirmation of double ownership, the contract for the sale of < > tenth no judicial interpretation There are provisions of property law. Judicial interpretation of (a) > sixth is the scope of regulation of the bona fide third party, supplement of the "property law > twenty-fourth content, but because of the" contract for the sale of the judicial interpretation of the existence of > logic errors, and did not achieve the desired effect. The importance of rules one point is to determine the scope of the third person in good faith, but our existing law does not give a clear, it will cause the problem of judicial practice. The third part is the reason analysis of the rules problems and perfect scheme. The reason is due to the dynamic and general public system different, not only including the delivery also includes registration, but with two different effects, the behavior is difficult to determine the real right state. In the special movable property changes the rules of the perfect plan, the author puts forward will be included in the registration The criteria for bona fide acquisition of class objects are applicable to the system of bona fide acquisition under the dual delivery of the concept delivery. < the judicial interpretation of property law > sixth > the deletion of the elements of the "payment consideration" in the third section and the scope of the bona fide third person only refer to the proposal of the registered mortgage right.

【学位授予单位】：新疆大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.2

【相似文献】