本文選題：區(qū)分原則 + 效力區(qū)分原則��； 參考：《鄭州大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：對(duì)作為物權(quán)法基本原則之一的區(qū)分原則的內(nèi)涵、理論基礎(chǔ)及其實(shí)踐意義的研究有助于研究如何適用效力區(qū)分原則。區(qū)分原則在物權(quán)變動(dòng)的過(guò)程中發(fā)揮著重要的作用,它在一定程度上會(huì)影響到物權(quán)法的體系,故研究該原則也會(huì)加深對(duì)與其有關(guān)的制度的理解。效力區(qū)分原則中的“區(qū)分”指的是區(qū)分物權(quán)變動(dòng)的原因與結(jié)果,使兩者的法律效力不同。適用該原則能對(duì)第三人的利益、非違約方利益及交易安全有效的保護(hù),對(duì)形成有機(jī)統(tǒng)一的民法財(cái)產(chǎn)法體系有積極的促進(jìn)作用。目前我國(guó)《物權(quán)法》對(duì)效力區(qū)分原則的規(guī)定過(guò)于簡(jiǎn)單,并且是原則性的規(guī)定,面對(duì)紛繁復(fù)雜的現(xiàn)實(shí)生活顯得有些蒼白無(wú)力。研究效力區(qū)分原則離不開(kāi)對(duì)物權(quán)行為理論的研究,關(guān)于物權(quán)行為理論的繼受問(wèn)題,從接觸到這一學(xué)說(shuō)開(kāi)始我國(guó)學(xué)界就爭(zhēng)論不斷,支持者和反對(duì)者的論戰(zhàn)一直很激烈。效力區(qū)分原則不承認(rèn)物權(quán)行為的獨(dú)立存在,但是參考了物權(quán)行為理論中的區(qū)分原則。本文的研究角度是對(duì)我國(guó)物權(quán)法、合同法、擔(dān)保法等相關(guān)的法律法規(guī)及司法解釋綜合分析,細(xì)致論證,結(jié)合學(xué)者的爭(zhēng)論觀點(diǎn)研究效力區(qū)分原則的理論基礎(chǔ)及適用。在文章的寫(xiě)作過(guò)程中運(yùn)用了概念分析研究法、實(shí)證分析研究法和比較分析研究法。文章的主體部分共分為三個(gè)部分。 第一部分探討效力區(qū)分原則理論基礎(chǔ)。區(qū)分合同效力和物權(quán)變動(dòng)效力,區(qū)分物權(quán)變動(dòng)的原因行為和結(jié)果行為,這兩個(gè)區(qū)分構(gòu)成了效力區(qū)分原則的內(nèi)涵。物權(quán)行為理論中的區(qū)分原則是研究效力區(qū)分原則的基礎(chǔ)。本部分首先論述了區(qū)分原則和效力區(qū)分原則的關(guān)系,繼而對(duì)物權(quán)行為理論的爭(zhēng)議進(jìn)行了分析,最后得出區(qū)分支配權(quán)和請(qǐng)求權(quán)以及區(qū)分負(fù)擔(dān)行為和處分行為這兩點(diǎn)是效力區(qū)分原則的理論基礎(chǔ)。 第二部分論述效力區(qū)分原則下的無(wú)權(quán)處分和善意取得制度,物權(quán)變動(dòng)模式的選擇不同對(duì)無(wú)權(quán)處分和善意取得的效力會(huì)產(chǎn)生不同的影響。目前世界上有意思主義、形式主義、交付主義、意思主義與形式主義相交錯(cuò)的四種物權(quán)變動(dòng)模式。我國(guó)的物權(quán)變動(dòng)模式以債權(quán)形式主義為主,此外還含有其他模式。經(jīng)過(guò)研究得出效力區(qū)分原則在實(shí)踐中有相當(dāng)重要的價(jià)值。其與無(wú)權(quán)處分、善意取得等制度有機(jī)統(tǒng)一后可以有效的維護(hù)第三人利益,保護(hù)交易安全。 第三部分論述了效力區(qū)分原則在我國(guó)動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)變動(dòng)、不動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)變動(dòng)及擔(dān)保物權(quán)變動(dòng)中的體現(xiàn),將該原則廣泛運(yùn)用于民商事審判實(shí)踐中是正確的選擇,人民法院在審理有關(guān)不動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓合同糾紛案件的過(guò)程中,應(yīng)當(dāng)依據(jù)《物權(quán)法》第15條的規(guī)定,結(jié)合效力區(qū)分原則,依法正確認(rèn)定有關(guān)不動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓合同的效力。
[Abstract]:The study of the connotation, theoretical basis and practical significance of the principle of distinction as one of the basic principles of property law is helpful to study how to apply the principle of distinction of effect. The principle of distinction plays an important role in the process of real right change. To a certain extent, it will affect the system of property law, so the study of this principle will also deepen the understanding of the system related to it. The distinction in the principle of distinction of effect refers to the reason and result of distinguishing the change of real right, which makes their legal effect different. The application of this principle can protect the interests of the third party, the interests of the non-defaulting party and the transaction safely and effectively, and play an active role in promoting the formation of an organic unified civil law system of property law. At present, the stipulation of the principle of differentiating effectiveness is too simple, and it is a rule of principle, facing the complicated and complicated real life, it is a little pale and powerless. The study of the principle of the distinction of effect can not be separated from the study of the theory of the act of real right. From the contact to this theory, the debate between the supporters and the opponents has been fierce. The principle of distinction of effect does not recognize the independent existence of act of real right, but it refers to the principle of distinction in the theory of act of real right. The research angle of this paper is a comprehensive analysis of the relevant laws and regulations and judicial interpretation of China's real right law, contract law, security law and so on, and a detailed demonstration, as well as the theoretical basis and application of the principle of differentiation of effectiveness in the light of scholars' controversial views. Conceptual analysis, empirical analysis and comparative analysis are used in the process of writing. The main body of the article is divided into three parts. The first part discusses the theoretical basis of the principle of differentiation of effectiveness. It distinguishes the effect of contract from the effect of change of real right, the cause act and result act of the change of real right, which constitute the connotation of the principle of differentiating effect. The principle of distinction in the theory of juristic act of real right is the basis of studying the principle of distinction of effect. This part firstly discusses the relationship between the principle of distinction and the principle of distinction of effect, and then analyzes the controversy of the theory of juristic act of real right. Finally, it is concluded that the distinction between dominant right and claim right, as well as between burden act and disposition act, are the theoretical basis of the principle of distinguishing validity. The second part discusses the system of unauthorized disposition and bona fide acquisition under the principle of distinction of effect. Different modes of real right change have different effects on the effectiveness of unauthorized disposition and bona fide acquisition. At present, there are four modes of real right change in the world, which are interesting doctrine, formalism, delivery doctrine, will doctrine and formalism. The mode of real right change in our country is mainly creditor's right formalism, in addition, it also contains other models. Through the study, it is concluded that the principle of force differentiation is of great value in practice. It can effectively safeguard the interests of the third party and protect the transaction security after the organic unification of the system such as unauthorized disposition, bona fide acquisition and so on. The third part discusses the principle of the differentiation of effectiveness in the change of real property of movable property, real property and security of real right change, the principle is widely used in civil and commercial trial practice is the correct choice. The people's court should correctly determine the validity of the contract of transfer of real property right according to the provisions of Article 15 of the Real right Law and the principle of discrimination of effectiveness in the course of hearing the dispute cases concerning the contract of transfer of real property right.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：鄭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 楊代雄;;物權(quán)變動(dòng)規(guī)范模式分析框架的重構(gòu)——兼及我國(guó)《物權(quán)法》中物權(quán)變動(dòng)規(guī)范模式的解讀[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2009年01期

2 陳永強(qiáng);羅思榮;;所有權(quán)移轉(zhuǎn)模式比較研究[J];法學(xué)雜志;2008年06期

3 崔文星;;論物權(quán)行為與債權(quán)行為的區(qū)分原則[J];河北法學(xué);2006年02期

4 孫憲忠;物權(quán)行為理論探源及其意義[J];法學(xué)研究;1996年03期

5 孫憲忠;物權(quán)變動(dòng)的原因與結(jié)果的區(qū)分原則[J];法學(xué)研究;1999年05期

6 謝懷h;,程嘯;物權(quán)行為理論辨析[J];法學(xué)研究;2002年04期

7 馬新彥;一物二賣的救濟(jì)與防范[J];法學(xué)研究;2005年02期

8 王姍姍;;物權(quán)變動(dòng)效力區(qū)分原則的理論基礎(chǔ)及實(shí)踐意義[J];學(xué)理論;2012年14期

9 應(yīng)秀良;;我國(guó)物權(quán)區(qū)分原則的理論與適用[J];人民司法;2009年07期

10 崔文星;;論區(qū)分原則在我國(guó)物權(quán)法中的體現(xiàn)[J];社會(huì)科學(xué);2008年08期

，

本文編號(hào)：2031800