物权请求权适用诉讼时效制度问题研究

发布时间：2018-02-24 14:39

本文关键词： 物权请求权诉讼时效物权保护　出处：《华中师范大学》2015年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：物权请求权制度属于物权保护的制度范畴,其所体现的主要价值是给予物权人最直接的自力救济的手段。其主要意义在于保持物权的完美状态,从而有利于加强对物权的保护,并显示出了物权保护在法律上的效力。目前,尽管有关物权请求权的理论正日趋成熟,但学界对其仍存在一定的争议。各国立法在对物权的效力或者物权的保护进行规定时都会涉及物权请求权,但其规定各有差异。在德国法上,物权请求权规定在所有权制度中,实际上是作为所有权的一种保护方法来加以规定的；而在我国台湾地区,物权请求权则是作为物权的效力或权能而得以规定。目前,虽然我国《物权法》在第三章对物权请求权进行了规定,但并没有明确物权请求权是否适用诉讼时效。因此,物权请求权是否适用诉讼时效在理论上颇有争议,也造成了法律实践中的困惑。本文拟对这一问题进行探讨,以期对物权请求权理论和制度构建有所裨益。全文共分四个部分：第一部分是物权请求权之界定。该部分首先分析了物权请求权的历史渊源,论证了物权请求权是从诉讼权利转变而来；其次,该部分探讨了物权请求权的独立性,并充分阐释了物权请求权的性质和具体形态。第二部分是物权请求权适用诉讼时效之理论争议。该部分首先对诉讼时效的演进过程和适用基础进行了深入分析：其次,该部分探讨了物权请求权适用诉讼时效方面的理论争议,并对这些争议进行了评析。第三部分是物权请求权适用诉讼时效之立法分析。该部分首先对我国法律法规和司法解释中与物权请求权适用诉讼时效有关的条款进行了分析；其次,该部分对域外立法中的有关条款进行了考察,特别是对法国、德国、日本、台湾地区的相关规定进行了研究。第四部分是物权请求权适用诉讼时效制度的理论构想。该部分首先通过对前文的论证进行分析,认为排除妨害请求权和消除危险请求权均不适用诉讼时效,唯有返还原物请求权有适用的可能；其次,该部分对返还原物请求权适用诉讼时效的理由、存在的疑问及其适用的例外进行了阐述。
[Abstract]:The system of real right of claim belongs to the system of real right protection, and its main value is to give the real right person the most direct means of self-relief, the main meaning of which is to maintain the perfect state of real right, which is conducive to strengthening the protection of real right. It also shows the legal effect of the protection of real right. At present, although the theory of right of claim in real right is maturing day by day, However, there are still some disputes about it in the academic circles. The legislation of various countries will involve the right of claim of real right when regulating the effect of real right or the protection of property right, but its provisions are different. In German law, the right of claim of real right of claim is stipulated in the system of ownership. In fact, it is stipulated as a method of protection of ownership; in Taiwan, however, the right of claim in real right is stipulated as the effect or power of real right. At present, Although the property Law of our country provides for the right of claim in real right in Chapter 3, it is not clear whether the right of claim in real right is applicable to the limitation of action. Therefore, whether the right of claim in real right is applicable to the limitation of action is controversial in theory. It also causes confusion in legal practice. This paper intends to discuss this problem. The thesis is divided into four parts: the first part is the definition of the right of claim in real right. It proves that the claim of real right is changed from litigation right. Secondly, this part discusses the independence of right of claim in real right. The second part is the theoretical dispute on the application of the limitation of action in real right. Firstly, it analyzes the evolution of the limitation of action and the basis of its application. This part probes into the theoretical dispute on the application of the limitation of action to the right of claim in real right. The third part is the legislative analysis of the limitation of action in the application of the right of claim in real right. This part firstly analyzes the provisions of our country's laws and regulations and judicial interpretation relating to the application of the limitation of action to the right of claim in real right. Secondly, this part examines the relevant provisions in the extraterritorial legislation, especially France, Germany, Japan, Part 4th is the theoretical conception of the application of the limitation of action system to the right of claim in real right. It is considered that the limitation of action is not applicable to both the right to exclude obstruction and the right to claim for the elimination of danger, and only the right to request the return of the original is possible; secondly, the reasons for the application of the limitation of action to the right of claim for the return of the original are in this part. The existence of the doubt and the application of the exception are described.
【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923.2

【参考文献】