不动产事实物权的适用与理论阐释

发布时间：2018-05-14 09:26

本文选题：不动产事实物权 + 正当原因　；参考：《现代法学》2015年04期

【摘要】：事实物权与法律物权相对,是指虽不符合物权公示要件但能够证明权利人享有真正物权的权利。近年来,最高人民法院在司法解释中使用了"事实物权"这一概念,由此引发相关法律体系的嵌入与兼容性思考。事实物权的正当性有两个论据:正当原因理论与动态物权理论,前者涉及物权取得须取决于一个正当原因,后者在于说明交易中的物权生成具有渐进性,承认物权变动过程中存在一种新型的由习惯法所创设的中间型权利。新型的转让型事实物权因不需要满足法定的公示要件,因而与传统法的物权法定、物权公示原则存在冲突,这些冲突在理论层面可以通过对物权法定原则的宽松解释和对物权公示要件主义的限缩解释,以及不完全物权理论来予以支撑与证立。
[Abstract]:The contrast between the real right of fact and the real right of law refers to the right which can prove that the right holder has the real right although it does not accord with the requirements of publicizing the real right. In recent years, the Supreme people's Court has used the concept of "real right of fact" in judicial interpretation, which leads to the embedding and compatibility of relevant legal systems. There are two arguments for the legitimacy of real right: the theory of legitimate cause and the theory of dynamic real right, the former involving the acquisition of real right must depend on a proper reason, the latter is to explain that the formation of real right in transaction is gradual. Recognize the existence of a new type of intermediate rights created by customary law in the process of real right change. The new type of transferred factual real right does not need to meet the statutory requirements of publicity, so it conflicts with the traditional law of property law, and the principle of publicizing real right exists. On the theoretical level these conflicts can be supported and proved by the loose interpretation of the legal principle of real right and the restrictive and condensed interpretation of the doctrine of public elements of real right as well as the theory of incomplete real right.
【作者单位】：中国计量学院法学院;
【分类号】：D913

【参考文献】