本文關(guān)鍵詞： 共有權(quán)益 按份共有 共同共有 夫妻一體共有　出處：《山東大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：美國法律制度發(fā)展時(shí)間長、內(nèi)容豐富、制度完備,在當(dāng)今世界中影響較大。美國財(cái)產(chǎn)法更是伴隨著財(cái)產(chǎn)私有制的盛行而迅速發(fā)展,成為最為完備的部門法之一。美國不動(dòng)產(chǎn)共有制度作為財(cái)產(chǎn)法的重要組成部分,對(duì)于我國共有制度的完善有非常重要的借鑒意義。本文在目前已有的研究成果的基礎(chǔ)上,全面、詳細(xì)的介紹了美國不動(dòng)產(chǎn)共有制度中的一些基本理論問題,試圖為完善我國不動(dòng)產(chǎn)共有制度貢獻(xiàn)自己的綿薄之力。 本文第一部分為不動(dòng)產(chǎn)共有制度概述。首先,筆者從美國財(cái)產(chǎn)法的歷史沿革、共有制度的概述、分類等方面開始討論,明確了美國財(cái)產(chǎn)法受到英國等國家的深遠(yuǎn)影響,并且仍然有一定的中世紀(jì)思想烙印,展現(xiàn)了美國財(cái)產(chǎn)法是如何一步步從封建的枷鎖中解脫；并簡要介紹了按份共有、共同共有以及夫妻一體共有三種共有方式的基本內(nèi)容,理清了三種共有方式的區(qū)別。最后,探討了在共有制度中"property"一詞的涵義,認(rèn)為美國共有制度中所指的財(cái)產(chǎn)在絕大多數(shù)情況下就是指不動(dòng)產(chǎn),因此將本文中的財(cái)產(chǎn)范圍縮小至不動(dòng)產(chǎn)。 本文第二部分為共有制度的設(shè)立。三種共有制度的設(shè)立方式各不相同。按份共有只需明確的意思表示即可。共同共有除了非常明確的表述之外還要具備四個(gè)統(tǒng)一：時(shí)間的統(tǒng)一、權(quán)源的統(tǒng)一、權(quán)益的統(tǒng)一和占有的統(tǒng)一,四者缺一不可。夫妻一體共有的設(shè)立也需要滿足四個(gè)統(tǒng)一的要件,還要滿足婚姻的統(tǒng)一,即只有符合法律規(guī)定的夫妻二人才能設(shè)立。如果在設(shè)立共有時(shí)表述不夠明確,夫妻之間推定設(shè)立的是夫妻一體共有,其他人則推定為設(shè)立的是按份共有。 本文第三部分探討了共有人之間的權(quán)利義務(wù)關(guān)系。共有人管理共有不動(dòng)產(chǎn)的方式由各共有人商議決定,法律不作限制。所有共有人都享有占有整個(gè)不動(dòng)產(chǎn)的權(quán)利,只要沒有非法剝奪其他共有人的占有權(quán),都可以隨意占有不動(dòng)產(chǎn)。不動(dòng)產(chǎn)出租給第三人所得的租金以及其他收益由不動(dòng)產(chǎn)共有人共享,按照共有比例進(jìn)行分配。維護(hù)共有不動(dòng)產(chǎn)的基本費(fèi)用由所有共有人分?jǐn)?共有人修繕共有不動(dòng)產(chǎn)的費(fèi)用無權(quán)要求其他共有人分?jǐn)?如協(xié)商無法解決,可以要求終止共有關(guān)系。 本文的第四部分為共有關(guān)系的終止。按份共有、共同共有和夫妻一體共有的共有人都可以通過轉(zhuǎn)讓自己在共有不動(dòng)產(chǎn)中份額的方式終止自己與其他共有人的共有關(guān)系。共同共有人將份額轉(zhuǎn)讓后,受讓人與之前的共同共有人之間形成按份共有關(guān)系。夫妻一體共有人無權(quán)單方轉(zhuǎn)讓其在共有不動(dòng)產(chǎn)中的份額,只有在共有人雙方都同意的情況下才能轉(zhuǎn)讓。共同共有還有可能因?yàn)楣灿腥藢⑵湓诠灿兄械姆蓊~抵押而終止。 本文的第五部分為美國不動(dòng)產(chǎn)共有制度的對(duì)我國的借鑒意義。 最后一部分為本文的結(jié)語,筆者總結(jié)概括了全文主要內(nèi)容。
[Abstract]:The American legal system has a long time of development, rich content and complete system, which has a great influence in the world today. The property law of the United States has developed rapidly with the prevalence of private ownership of property. As an important part of property law, the system of real estate ownership in the United States is of great significance for the perfection of the common ownership system in our country. This paper introduces in detail some basic theoretical problems in the American real estate ownership system, and tries to contribute to the perfection of the real estate ownership system in our country. The first part of this paper is an overview of the real estate ownership system. Firstly, the author begins to discuss the historical evolution of American property law, the overview and classification of the common ownership system, and makes it clear that the American property law is deeply influenced by the United Kingdom and other countries. And there is still a certain brand of medieval ideology, showing how American property law is step by step from the feudal shackles, and briefly introduces the basic contents of the three common ways of sharing by share, common ownership and husband and wife. Finally, it discusses the meaning of the term "property" in the common ownership system, and concludes that the property referred to in the United States' common ownership system refers to real estate in most cases. Therefore, the scope of property in this article is reduced to real estate. The second part of this article is about the establishment of the common ownership system. The three kinds of mutual ownership systems are different in setting up ways. The common common ownership requires only a clear expression of meaning. Besides the very clear expression, the common common ownership also has four systems. One: unity of time, The unification of the source of power, the unification of rights and interests, and the unity of possession are indispensable. The establishment of a community of husband and wife also needs to satisfy the four elements of unity, and also to meet the unity of marriage. That is, only two couples who meet the requirements of the law can be set up. If the formulation of joint ownership is not clear enough, the husband and wife are presumed to have a joint husband and wife, while others are presumed to be set up in accordance with the share of the husband and wife. The third part of this paper discusses the relationship between the rights and obligations of the joint owners. The mode of the joint owners' management of the common real estate is decided by the joint owners, and the law is not limited. All the joint owners have the right to possess the whole real estate. As long as there is no illegal deprivation of the possession of other joint owners, they may take possession of immovable property at will. The rent and other proceeds of the lease of the immovable property to a third party shall be shared by the co-owner of the immovable property, The basic cost of the maintenance of the common real estate shall be shared by all the co-owners, and the common owner shall not have the right to ask the other co-owners to share the costs of repairing the common real estate. If the negotiation cannot be resolved, the joint ownership relationship may be terminated. The 4th part of this article is the termination of the common relationship. A joint co-owner and a joint husband and wife may terminate their joint relationship with the other co-owners by transferring their share of the common real estate. The transferee and the former co-owner form a co-ownership relationship. The husband and wife shall not have the right to transfer unilaterally their share of the common real estate, It can be transferred only with the mutual consent of the joint owner. The joint ownership may also be terminated by the joint owner mortgaging his share in the joint ownership. The 5th part of this paper is the reference meaning of American real estate ownership system to our country. The last part is the conclusion of this paper, the author summarizes the main contents of the paper.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D971.2;DD913

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 董春華;;試論美國財(cái)產(chǎn)法中的聯(lián)合所有制度——兼評(píng)其與中國共有制度的比較[J];法學(xué)雜志;2010年07期

，

本文編號(hào)：1524577