吴某诉房管局一案的法律分析

发布时间：2018-04-26 16:41

本文选题：物权设立 + 登记操作实践　；参考：《兰州大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：2007年10月1日我国《物权法》开始施行后,对因物的归属和利用而产生的民事关系进行了大范围的调整,与其相对应的不动产物权在登记设立方面的法律规定也有了大幅度的修订,最引人关注的就是2008年7月1日起《房屋登记办法》施行后,原来的《城市房屋权属登记管理办法》(建设部令第57号)、《建设部关于修改城市房屋权属登记管理办法的决定》(建设部令第99号)同时废止。而在现实的司法操作实践和房屋登记机构实际工作操作流程中却出现不少问题,导致房屋真实产权人在经过多次诉讼,用尽各种救济途径后仍然不能有效维护自己的合法权益,这个问题在实践中不时困扰着一线法官,至今仍无明确的答案,在给当事人增加诸多诉累的同时也降低了法院和房地产登记机构的工作效率。本文共三部分,第一部分,介绍了因为撤销房屋所有权证书后导致房屋至今仍处于无主状态无法办理房屋所有权证书一案的案情及争议焦点；第二部分,从我国目前法律框架下不动产物权创设、实际不动产登记操作实践的角度出发,分析了案件双方争议的焦点,对判决和实际登记操作中形成的法律僵局进行分析；第三部分,对类似案件在司法实践中遇到的困惑进行了归纳和陈述,同时着重提出保留原《城市房屋权属登记办法》中纠错机制合理性的可能性,继而给出解决类似案件的法律建议。
[Abstract]:On October 1, 2007, after the implementation of the property Law in China, the civil relations arising from the ownership and utilization of the property were adjusted in a wide range. The corresponding legal provisions on the registration and establishment of real estate rights have also been substantially revised. The most interesting thing is that after the implementation of the Housing Registration measures on July 1, 2008, The original "measures for the Registration and Administration of Urban Housing tenure" (decree No. 57 of the Ministry of Construction and the decision of the Ministry of Construction on modifying the methods for the Registration and Administration of Urban Housing tenure) (decree No. 99 of the Ministry of Construction) were annulled at the same time. However, there are many problems in the actual judicial operation practice and the actual operation process of the housing registration organization, which leads to the real property owner of the house still unable to effectively safeguard his legitimate rights and interests after many lawsuits and exhausting all kinds of remedies. This question puzzles the front-line judges from time to time in practice, but there is still no clear answer. It not only adds many lawsuits to the parties, but also reduces the working efficiency of the courts and real estate registration agencies. There are three parts in this paper. The first part introduces the facts of the case and the focus of the dispute that the house is still in the state of no owner and cannot handle the certificate of ownership because of the revocation of the certificate of ownership of the house. From the point of view of the creation of real property right under the current legal framework of our country and the operation practice of real estate registration, this paper analyzes the focus of the dispute between the two parties in the case, and analyzes the legal deadlock formed in the judgment and the actual registration operation; the third part, This paper sums up and states the puzzles encountered in the judicial practice of similar cases, and puts forward the possibility of retaining the rationality of the error-correcting mechanism in the original "Registration method of Urban Housing ownership", and then gives some legal suggestions to solve the similar cases.
【学位授予单位】：兰州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D920.5;D923

【参考文献】