论留置权制度的历史发展——罗马法、意大利法与中国法之比较

发布时间：2018-01-18 06:04

本文关键词：论留置权制度的历史发展——罗马法、意大利法与中国法之比较　出处：《厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2013年02期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：中国2007年颁布的《物权法》将留置权置于第四编"担保物权"之下,继"抵押权"、"质权"之后设专章加以规定。留置权在罗马法中虽经历了从程序性制度到实体法制度的发展,但始终未曾被赋予对债的"物的担保"的性质。《意大利民法典》采用优先权性质的留置权制度,中国《物权法》采用的则是担保物权性质的留置权制度。前者产生于交易快捷性和安全性的需要,威慑相对人履行义务,其通过司法程序执行仅是偶然;后者具有迟延抗辩和物的担保的双重功能,在不履行时允许权利人从留置物获得满足。但《物权法》把债务人迟延设为行使留置权的条件,其有关条文在执行主体和债权人延迟"接受"的效果上令人疑惑,进而使留置权失去了其应有的威慑功能。可行的解决办法是取消留置权的担保物权性质,重构该制度内部的有机性。
[Abstract]:In 2007, the Law of Real Rights promulgated in China placed the lien under 4th series "Security interest", followed by "Mortgage". After "pledge right", a special chapter is set up to stipulate it. Although the lien has experienced the development from procedural system to substantive law system in Roman law. However, it has never been given the nature of "security in rem" of the debt. The Italian Civil Code adopts a lien system of priority nature. China's Real right Law adopts the lien system of the property right of security. The former comes from the need of quickness and safety of transaction, deterring the counterpart to fulfill its obligations, and its execution through judicial procedure is only accidental; The latter has the dual function of delay defense and rem security, which allows the obligee to obtain satisfaction from the lien in case of non-performance. However, the delay of the debtor is set as the condition of exercising the lien in the property Law. The effect of the delay in "acceptance" by the subject of enforcement and the creditor is puzzling, and the lien loses its due deterrent function. The feasible solution is to remove the nature of the security interest of the lien. Reconstructing the organic nature of the system.
【作者单位】：卡西诺大学法学院;
【分类号】：D954.6;D923
【正文快照】： 一、留置权在中国担保诸法中的定位及其立法者意图中华人民共和国2007年颁布的《物权法》为意大利法学家提供了许多兴趣点,其中关于留置权的规定,毫无疑问为我们提供了一个很好的机会去思考中国立法者通过该制度去保护一系列法律关系的方式:对产生于这些法律关系的债的履行提

【相似文献】