【摘要】： 居住權(quán)起源于羅馬法時(shí)期,在羅馬法里,居住權(quán)是指居住他人房屋的權(quán)利。羅馬法之所以設(shè)置居住權(quán)制度,最初是出于保障部分沒有繼承權(quán)而又需要照顧的家庭成員的基本生活需要。后世的大陸法系國(guó)家,如法國(guó)、德國(guó)、意大利、瑞士等國(guó),在其民法典中,都有居住權(quán)制度的相關(guān)規(guī)定。英國(guó)的婚姻家庭法和美國(guó)的離婚判例中也有與居住權(quán)制度的相關(guān)規(guī)定。但在西法東漸的過程中,日本、韓國(guó)和我國(guó)的臺(tái)灣地區(qū)的民法典,都沒有居住權(quán)制度的相關(guān)規(guī)定。 我國(guó)在制定《物權(quán)法》的過程中,物權(quán)法草案中的居住權(quán)制度經(jīng)歷了從無到有,再從有到無的過程,2007年3月16日全國(guó)人大通過的《物權(quán)法》也沒有居住權(quán)的規(guī)定。《物權(quán)法》已頒布兩年多,我國(guó)是否需要居住權(quán)制度,筆者對(duì)此持肯定態(tài)度。 本文由導(dǎo)言、正文、結(jié)語三部分組成,正文由居住權(quán)制度概述、羅馬法及其他國(guó)家關(guān)于居住權(quán)的規(guī)定與分析、我國(guó)是否應(yīng)該進(jìn)行居住權(quán)立法和我國(guó)居住權(quán)制度的立法建議四章組成,其中正文第三章和第四章是本文的主體部分。 導(dǎo)言對(duì)本文的背景作了概括性的介紹。 第一章是關(guān)于居住權(quán)制度的概述,從居住權(quán)的概念、法律性質(zhì)以及與相關(guān)制度的比較三個(gè)方面進(jìn)行了論述。在居住權(quán)概念方面,介紹了主要大陸法系國(guó)家居住權(quán)的概念和我國(guó)學(xué)界對(duì)居住權(quán)概念的界定。在分析總結(jié)各種居住權(quán)概念的特征后,本文對(duì)居住權(quán)概念作了界定。在性質(zhì)方面,居住權(quán)屬于物權(quán),是他物權(quán)中的用益物權(quán)。通過居住權(quán)與租賃權(quán)、借用權(quán)和典權(quán)的比較分析得出居住權(quán)的功能并不能被這些制度所取代。 第二章介紹羅馬法及其他國(guó)家關(guān)于居住權(quán)的規(guī)定,并對(duì)相關(guān)規(guī)定作了分析。首先介紹了羅馬法上的居住權(quán)制度,分析羅馬法為什么要設(shè)立居住權(quán)制度,其次介紹了居住權(quán)制度在大陸法系主要國(guó)家的繼受和發(fā)展、英美法的相關(guān)制度以及東亞各國(guó)對(duì)居住權(quán)制度繼受的中斷,在此基礎(chǔ)上,分析了它們各自的原因。最后通過分析總結(jié),得出相應(yīng)的啟示。 第三章論述了我國(guó)是否應(yīng)該進(jìn)行居住權(quán)立法。筆者首先介紹支持居住權(quán)立法的主要理由和反對(duì)居住權(quán)立法的主要理由,并分別進(jìn)行了評(píng)析。在此基礎(chǔ)上,筆者對(duì)我國(guó)居住權(quán)立法作了理性思考,并列舉了一些《物權(quán)法》頒布后新出現(xiàn)的案例及其解決途徑,以此說明我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐和現(xiàn)實(shí)生活中都需要居住權(quán)制度。 第四章對(duì)我國(guó)居住權(quán)制度的立法發(fā)表了一些建議。首先介紹了我國(guó)學(xué)界關(guān)于居住權(quán)制度立法體例的建議,通過分析比較,本文提出了一種符合我國(guó)國(guó)情的立法體例。接著對(duì)我國(guó)最近一次規(guī)定居住權(quán)制度的物權(quán)法草案即物權(quán)法草案第四次審議稿進(jìn)行評(píng)析。 結(jié)語部分提出,雖然我國(guó)現(xiàn)行的《物權(quán)法》沒有規(guī)定居住權(quán)制度,但由于我國(guó)社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的需要,未來在我國(guó)民法典中建立符合我國(guó)國(guó)情的居住權(quán)制度是大勢(shì)所趨。
[Abstract]:The right of residence originates from the period of Roman law. In Roman law, the right of residence refers to the right to live in another person's house. The reason why Roman law set up residence right system was to protect the basic living needs of some family members who had no right of inheritance and needed to be cared for. Later civil law countries, such as France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland and other countries, in their civil codes, have the relevant provisions of the right of abode system. British marriage and family law and divorce cases in the United States also have provisions related to the right of abode system. However, in the process of the gradual development of Western France, the civil codes of Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have no relevant provisions of the right of abode system. In the process of formulating the property Law in China, the residence right system in the draft of the Real right Law has experienced from nothing to existence. Again, there is no right of abode in the property Law passed by the National people's Congress on March 16, 2007. It has been promulgated for more than two years, and the author holds a positive attitude about whether China needs a residence right system. This paper is composed of three parts: introduction, text and conclusion. The text is made up of an overview of the system of residence rights, the provisions and analysis of Roman law and other countries on the right of residence. Whether our country should carry on the residence right legislation and our country residence right system legislative proposal four chapters composition, in which the main body part of this article is the body chapter three and the fourth chapter. The introduction gives a general introduction to the background of this paper. The first chapter is an overview of the right of residence system, from the concept of the right of residence, the legal nature and the comparison with the relevant systems are discussed. In terms of the concept of the right of residence, this paper introduces the concept of the right of residence in the main civil law countries and the definition of the concept of the right of residence in the academic circles of our country. After analyzing and summarizing the characteristics of various concepts of residence right, this paper defines the concept of residence right. In nature, the right of residence belongs to real right and is the usufruct right of his real right. Through the comparative analysis of the right of residence and the right of lease, it is concluded that the function of the right of residence cannot be replaced by these systems. The second chapter introduces the Roman law and other countries about the right of residence, and makes an analysis of the relevant provisions. First of all, it introduces the residence right system in Roman law, analyzes why the Roman law should establish the residence right system, and then introduces the succession and development of the residence right system in the main countries of the continental law system. On the basis of the relevant system of Anglo-American law and the interruption of residence right system in East Asian countries, their respective reasons are analyzed. Finally, through the analysis and summary, the corresponding enlightenment is obtained. The third chapter discusses whether our country should carry on the residence right legislation. Firstly, the author introduces the main reasons of supporting the legislation of residence right and the main reason of opposing the legislation of residence right. On this basis, the author makes rational thinking on the legislation of residence right in our country, and enumerates some new cases and their solutions after the promulgation of Real right Law, so as to show that the system of residence right is needed in judicial practice and in real life in our country. The fourth chapter makes some suggestions on the legislation of residence right system in our country. First of all, the author introduces the suggestions of Chinese academic circles on the legislative style of residence right system, and through the analysis and comparison, this paper puts forward a kind of legislative style which is in line with the national conditions of our country. Then it comments on the draft of the property Law, the fourth draft of the Real right Law, which provides for the right of residence system in our country. The conclusion part points out that although the current Real right Law does not provide for the residence right system, it is the trend of the times to establish the residence right system in the civil code of our country in the future because of the need of the social and economic development of our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 滕曉春;;《物權(quán)法》的一大缺憾——居住權(quán)制度的刪除[J];研究生法學(xué);2007年03期

2 陳信勇,藍(lán)鄧駿;居住權(quán)的源流及其立法的理性思考[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年03期

3 王國(guó)金;;我國(guó)居住權(quán)制度若干問題探析[J];法律適用;2006年08期

4 王富博;;居住權(quán)制度適用范圍初探 兼評(píng)《中華人民共和國(guó)物權(quán)法(草案)》的相關(guān)規(guī)定[J];法律適用;2006年Z1期

5 黃松有;;物權(quán)法立法中若干爭(zhēng)議問題之我見[J];法學(xué)家;2006年01期

6 陳耀東,賀立群;論居住權(quán)制度在我國(guó)的建立[J];南開學(xué)報(bào);2005年02期

7 馬俊駒,尹梅;論物權(quán)法的發(fā)展與我國(guó)物權(quán)法體系的完善[J];武漢大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1996年05期

8 劉閱春;居住權(quán)的源流及立法借鑒意義[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2004年06期

9 錢明星;關(guān)于在我國(guó)物權(quán)法中設(shè)置居住權(quán)的幾個(gè)問題[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2001年05期

10 申衛(wèi)星;;視野拓展與功能轉(zhuǎn)換:我國(guó)設(shè)立居住權(quán)必要性的多重視角[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2005年05期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 陳華彬;[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2004年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王富博;居住權(quán)研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 張巖;居住權(quán)制度研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2248544