本文選題：采礦權(quán)　切入點(diǎn)：準(zhǔn)用益物權(quán)屬性　出處：《內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：礦產(chǎn)資源是人類生產(chǎn)生活和社會(huì)發(fā)展進(jìn)步的重要物質(zhì)基礎(chǔ)。根據(jù)我國相關(guān)法律規(guī)定,采礦權(quán)是指采礦權(quán)人在依法取得的采礦許可證規(guī)定的范圍內(nèi),開采礦產(chǎn)資源并且獲得所開采的礦產(chǎn)品的權(quán)利。我國的采礦權(quán)來源于于礦產(chǎn)資源國家所有權(quán),是礦產(chǎn)資源國家所有權(quán)的主要實(shí)現(xiàn)形式。然而,長(zhǎng)久以來就采礦權(quán)的法律屬性,學(xué)界并沒有統(tǒng)一的觀點(diǎn)。針對(duì)采礦權(quán)所具有的不同法律特征,理論界存在著“自物權(quán)說”、“用益物權(quán)說”、“準(zhǔn)物權(quán)說”以及“特許物權(quán)說”等不同學(xué)說。采礦權(quán)的白物權(quán)說充分認(rèn)識(shí)到采礦權(quán)在設(shè)立和行使過程中逐步消耗和轉(zhuǎn)移國家的礦產(chǎn)資源,并且在理論上存在消耗殆盡的問題,因此“極端”的認(rèn)為采礦權(quán)為自物權(quán),但由于我國《憲法》和《物權(quán)法》規(guī)定的礦藏、礦產(chǎn)資源屬于國家所有,因此采礦權(quán)的“自物權(quán)說”不應(yīng)當(dāng)被采納。采礦權(quán)的“用益物權(quán)說”為采礦權(quán)私權(quán)性的彰顯作出了很大貢獻(xiàn),但畢竟采礦權(quán)在取得方式和行使過程都與傳統(tǒng)的用益物權(quán)有著很大的區(qū)別,因此肯定采礦權(quán)“用益物權(quán)說”的積極意義但不能將采礦權(quán)界定為是純粹的用益物權(quán)。此外其他學(xué)說理論上也都存在著一定程度的不足。2007年《物權(quán)法》的頒布,將采礦權(quán)置于“用益物權(quán)”編下的規(guī)定,并沒有消除學(xué)界關(guān)于采礦權(quán)性質(zhì)的爭(zhēng)論。在分析比較采礦權(quán)各種學(xué)說的合理性和不足的基礎(chǔ)上,筆者將采礦權(quán)的法律屬性界定為一種準(zhǔn)用益物權(quán)。所謂準(zhǔn)用益物權(quán)主要是指特別法上的物權(quán),因其法律內(nèi)容中的特殊性故區(qū)別于物權(quán)法上的物權(quán)分類,但準(zhǔn)用益物權(quán)在法律適用上應(yīng)當(dāng)準(zhǔn)用有關(guān)調(diào)整不動(dòng)產(chǎn)和用益物權(quán)等法律規(guī)定。由于,采礦權(quán)來源于礦產(chǎn)資源國家所有權(quán),因此,礦產(chǎn)資源所有權(quán)是采礦權(quán)的“母權(quán)”,國家與采礦權(quán)人具有所有權(quán)人和使用權(quán)人之間的關(guān)系,這也使得采礦權(quán)與用益物權(quán)有了許多相似的特征,但由于采礦權(quán)在取得方式和權(quán)利行使過程中存在著諸多公權(quán)力的限制,與傳統(tǒng)用益物權(quán)相區(qū)別,所以不應(yīng)當(dāng)將采礦權(quán)的法律性質(zhì)界定為用益物權(quán),但在法律適用上,應(yīng)當(dāng)適用用益物權(quán)等相關(guān)法律規(guī)定來調(diào)整采礦權(quán)的內(nèi)容。采礦權(quán)的準(zhǔn)用益物權(quán)屬性可以為采礦權(quán)的取得和轉(zhuǎn)讓實(shí)踐提供更好的指導(dǎo)。此外,由于礦產(chǎn)資源具有稀缺性、不可再生性等特點(diǎn),礦產(chǎn)資源的開發(fā)和開采事關(guān)礦產(chǎn)資源所有人的利益以及社會(huì)公共利益、環(huán)境保護(hù)和國家安全等問題,所以要正確認(rèn)識(shí)和運(yùn)用采礦權(quán)在行使過程中的國家所有人與采礦權(quán)人的關(guān)系以及公權(quán)力限制,從而更好地維護(hù)國家、社會(huì)和采礦權(quán)人的利益,促進(jìn)我國礦產(chǎn)業(yè)健康持續(xù)發(fā)展。本文除引言與結(jié)語外,共分四個(gè)部分：第一部分評(píng)析采礦權(quán)法律屬性的爭(zhēng)議。首先,回顧私法、環(huán)境資源法、公法等不同學(xué)科研究領(lǐng)域針對(duì)采礦權(quán)的法律屬性所采的具體觀點(diǎn),分析不同學(xué)說的支持論據(jù),揭示采礦權(quán)各種學(xué)說的合理性和不足。為給采礦權(quán)法律屬性一個(gè)明確的界定提供一定的理論基礎(chǔ)。第二部分采礦權(quán)準(zhǔn)用益物權(quán)屬性的確定性和合理性分析。這一部分為本文論述的重點(diǎn)。本部分主要從采礦權(quán)的主體、客體、物權(quán)效力、私權(quán)屬性及他物權(quán)本質(zhì)五個(gè)方面來論述采礦權(quán)的準(zhǔn)用益物權(quán)屬性,并從采礦權(quán)法律適用的明確性、采礦權(quán)取得制度中的特殊性以及采礦權(quán)人義務(wù)多重性等角度分析將采礦權(quán)界定為準(zhǔn)用益物權(quán)的合理性,在此基礎(chǔ)上,筆者還論述了采礦權(quán)準(zhǔn)用益物權(quán)屬性對(duì)采礦權(quán)取得和轉(zhuǎn)讓等方面的意義和價(jià)值。第三部分礦產(chǎn)資源國家所有權(quán)人與采礦權(quán)人的關(guān)系分析。在這一部分里,筆者主要論述了一般理論下所有權(quán)人與用益物權(quán)人之間的關(guān)系,并進(jìn)而分析了國家作為礦產(chǎn)資源所有權(quán)人與采礦權(quán)人關(guān)系方面的特殊性,在此基礎(chǔ)上,要求采礦權(quán)在出讓過程引入競(jìng)爭(zhēng)機(jī)制,重新認(rèn)識(shí)行政許可的作用,最終實(shí)現(xiàn)國家所有權(quán)人與采礦權(quán)人的利益平衡。第四部分分析采礦權(quán)行使過程中的公權(quán)力限制問題。該部分主要論述采礦權(quán)作為準(zhǔn)用益物權(quán)的特殊性,即采礦權(quán)在行使過程中存在公權(quán)力限制的問題�；诘V產(chǎn)資源的稀缺性、公共利益的維護(hù)和環(huán)境保護(hù)的要求是公權(quán)力限制的理論基礎(chǔ)。其次,分析了在現(xiàn)有制度下,行政機(jī)關(guān)通過礦產(chǎn)資源的整體規(guī)劃、和對(duì)采礦權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓方式、條件和程序的限制來闡述公權(quán)力限制過多的現(xiàn)狀及存在的問題。
[Abstract]:Mineral resources is an important material foundation for social development and progress of human life and production. According to China's relevant laws and regulations, the mining right refers to the mining right in the scope of the legally obtained mining license regulations, the exploitation of mineral resources and the mining of mineral products in China. The right of mining rights from mineral resources state ownership is the main form of national ownership of mineral resources. However, the legal attribute of long mining rights, the academic circle has not unified view. In accordance with the different legal characteristics of mining rights, the theoretical existence of "property", "usufructuary right", "quasi real right and" chartered right "and other different theories. The mining right said white property fully aware of rights in the process of gradually established and exercised consumption and transfer of the country's mineral resources mining, and consumption in theory Out of the problem, so that the "extreme" mining rights from property, but because of China's "constitution" and "property law" provisions of the mineral resources, mineral resources belong to the state, so the mining right "right" should not be adopted. The mining right "usufructuary right" has made a great contribution to highlight the mining rights of private rights, but after all, the mining right in the way to obtain and exercise process with the traditional usufructuary right has a big difference, so the positive significance of mining right "usufructuary right" but not the mining right is defined as pure usufructuary right. In addition to other theories also exist lack of.2007 to a certain extent in "property law" promulgated, the mining rights provisions in "usufructuary right" series of does not eliminate the academic circles on the nature of mining right dispute. After analyzing and comparing various theories of mining rights is reasonable and not Foot on the basis of the legal attribute of the mining right is defined as a quasi usufructuary right. The so-called quasi usufruct mainly refers to the special law on property rights, property classification because of its special legal content so different from the property law, but quasi usufructuary right in the application of the law should be permitted on do not adjust the provisions of the chattel usufructuary right and law. Because the mining rights derived from the ownership of mineral resources, the state ownership of mineral resources is the mining right "matriarchy", and the national mining right people have ownership and use right relationship among people, which also makes the mining right and usufruct has many similar features, but because of the mining right has many public power restriction in the way to obtain and exercise of rights, and the phase difference between the traditional usufructuary right, so it should not be the legal nature of the mining right is defined as usufructuary right, but in the law The application shall apply, usufruct and other relevant laws to adjust the mining right content. Quasi usufructuary right nature of mining rights can provide better mining rights to acquire and transfer practice. In addition, because the mineral resources are scarce, non renewable and other characteristics, the development and exploitation of mineral resources related to mineral resources all people's interests and social public interests, environmental protection and national security issues, constraints and so to correctly understand and apply the mining rights in the exercise of all countries and mining rights and public power, so as to better safeguard the national, social and mining rights to the interests of the people, promote the health of China's mining industry continued development. Besides introduction and conclusion this paper is divided into four parts: the first part is analysis of the legal attribute of mining rights disputes. Firstly, review the law, environmental law, law and other disciplines The specific point of view on the legal nature of mining right of mining, analysis the different theory argument reveals various theories of mining right rationality and shortcomings. For mining a clear definition to provide a theoretical basis for the legal attribute of mining rights. The second part of rationality and analysis to determine the usufruct property this part is the point of this article. This part is mainly from the main body, the object of mining right, real right, usufructuary right quasi private attribute attribute and his property in five aspects of mining rights, clear and applicable law from the mining rights, mining rights and mining rights to obtain the special duty of multiple the angles of the system in the analysis of the mining right should be defined as the rationality of quasi usufructuary right, on this basis, the author also discusses the mining right quasi usufructuary right attribute of mining rights and other aspects of the transfer The analysis of the relationship between meaning and value. The third part of the national ownership of mineral resource and mining rights. In this part, the author mainly discusses the relationship between the owner and the general theory of the usufructuary right holder, and then analyzes the national particularity as the ownership of mineral resources and mining rights relations, this based on the requirements of the mining right in the process of introducing competition mechanism, re understanding of the function of the administrative license, and ultimately achieve the balance of interests of state ownership and mining rights. The fourth part is the analysis of mining rights in the process of exercising public power constraints. This part mainly discusses the particularity of mining rights as quasi usufructuary right, the mining right there are restrictions on the issue of public power in the process of the exercise. The scarcity of mineral resources based on the maintenance of public interests and the requirements of environmental protection is the theoretical foundation of public power restriction. Secondly, under the existing system, the administrative organs through the overall planning of mineral resources, and the restrictions on the transfer of mining rights, conditions and procedures, elaborate the current situation and existing problems of too much public power.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 黃桂琴;;我國自然資源國家所有權(quán)物權(quán)屬性研究[J];石家莊經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年03期

2 肖國興;論中國自然資源產(chǎn)權(quán)制度的經(jīng)濟(jì)理性（下）[J];環(huán)境保護(hù);1997年10期

3 王太高;公共利益范疇研究[J];南京社會(huì)科學(xué);2005年07期

4 王建軍;王建容;;公共利益的內(nèi)涵及其界定機(jī)制研究[J];中共四川省委省級(jí)機(jī)關(guān)黨校學(xué)報(bào);2012年02期

5 李顯冬;石文墨;;礦業(yè)權(quán)的私權(quán)法律屬性[J];北京石油管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 孫莉;采礦權(quán)性質(zhì)及制度完善研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：1728403