發(fā)布時間：2018-05-09 17:39

  本文選題：不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押 + 實踐評析　； 參考：《中央民族大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著國家基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施項目發(fā)展,產(chǎn)生了大量的融資需求,促使各大金融機構(gòu)不斷探索新思路,以迎合該需求,擴展自己的業(yè)務(wù)范圍。在這種背景下,基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施類的不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)被用于質(zhì)押擔(dān)保的標(biāo)的進(jìn)行貸款這一形式開始在金融領(lǐng)域興起。但是我們現(xiàn)在所提到的不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押擔(dān)保不僅僅限于基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施類不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán),其外延范圍在實踐發(fā)展過程中不斷被擴大,但在立法層面卻沒有及時響應(yīng)該發(fā)展趨勢,為不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)的發(fā)展提供足夠的制度支撐。2000年9月,最高人民法院通過了《擔(dān)保法解釋》,該解釋第九十七條以列舉的方式中首次確認(rèn)了幾種不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押的效力。近年來,在實踐中,用于融資的不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)范圍不斷豐富擴大,除上述司法解釋中明確提到的幾類基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施類的不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押外,相當(dāng)多民用的不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押也進(jìn)入了融資領(lǐng)域,例如寫字樓或者商鋪的租賃權(quán)質(zhì)押等。從理論層面看,不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押是一項新的擔(dān)保制度模式,從實踐發(fā)展角度分析,它是銀行業(yè)界一項新型的金融業(yè)務(wù)。相對于傳統(tǒng)的出質(zhì)物,理論支持比較匱乏,實踐操作也比較混亂,所以有必要對不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押的概念、法律性質(zhì)等系列問題進(jìn)行探討和研究,在理論上理清與相關(guān)類似概念的界限,為實踐提供堅實的理論基礎(chǔ),有效指導(dǎo)實踐中該制度的不斷深入發(fā)展。本文主要分為四個部分,首先從概念上對不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押進(jìn)行界定,就不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)的性質(zhì)進(jìn)行深刻探討,并將其定性為一種新型的特殊財產(chǎn)權(quán),就其理論爭議進(jìn)行了不同觀點的梳理。其次,通過對我國部分地區(qū)就不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押實踐嘗試情況的分析,可以發(fā)現(xiàn)目前關(guān)于該制度相關(guān)文件規(guī)定不完善,法律效力層級較低,在質(zhì)押擔(dān)保的公示、實現(xiàn)方面還存在不足,有待于完善。隨后,通過對美國、法國、日本等國家相關(guān)類似制度的的比較考察,比較了國內(nèi)外相關(guān)質(zhì)押制度的異同,并通過他們的經(jīng)驗拓寬我國理論研究的視野,旨在通過對立法目的等方面的分析,進(jìn)一步強調(diào)該制度的意義。最后,基于理論與實踐兩方面的分析,歸納目前該制度的風(fēng)險,提出自己制度構(gòu)想。誠摯期望本文能為推動我國不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押理論的研究作出貢獻(xiàn)。
[Abstract]:With the development of national infrastructure projects, a large number of financing needs have been generated, which urges major financial institutions to constantly explore new ideas to meet this demand and expand their business scope. In this context, the real estate income right of infrastructure type is used to pledge the subject matter of guarantee to make loans, which began to rise in the field of finance. However, the pledge of real estate income right mentioned by us is not only limited to the real estate income right of infrastructure category, but its extension has been continuously expanded in the process of practical development, but it does not respond to the trend of development in time at the legislative level. In September 2000, the Supreme people's Court adopted the interpretation of the guarantee Law, which, in the way listed in Article 97, for the first time confirmed the validity of the pledge of the right to real estate income. In recent years, in practice, the range of real estate income rights used for financing has been continuously expanded, except for the pledge of real estate income rights of several types of infrastructure mentioned explicitly in the above judicial interpretation. A large number of civil real estate income pledge has also entered the field of financing, such as office premises or shops lease pledge and so on. From a theoretical point of view, the pledge of real estate income right is a new mode of guarantee system. From the perspective of practical development, it is a new type of financial business in the banking sector. Compared with the traditional pledge, the theoretical support is relatively scarce, and the practical operation is also confused. Therefore, it is necessary to discuss and study the concept and legal nature of the pledge of the right to real estate proceeds. In theory, it clarifies the boundary with the similar concepts, provides a solid theoretical basis for practice, and effectively guides the further development of the system in practice. This paper is mainly divided into four parts. Firstly, it defines the pledge of real estate income right from the concept, deeply discusses the nature of real estate income right, and characterizes it as a new type of special property right. In this paper, the author sorts out different points of view on the theoretical controversy. Secondly, by analyzing the practice of pledge of real estate proceeds in some areas of our country, we can find that the relevant documents about this system are not perfect, the level of legal effect is low, and the pledge guarantee is published. The realization aspect still has the insufficiency, needs to be consummated. Then, through the comparative investigation of the similar systems in the United States, France, Japan and other countries, this paper compares the similarities and differences between the relevant pledge systems at home and abroad, and broadens the perspective of our theoretical research through their experience. The purpose is to emphasize the significance of the system through the analysis of legislative purpose and so on. Finally, based on the analysis of theory and practice, this paper sums up the risks of the present system and puts forward its own institutional conception. It is sincerely expected that this paper will contribute to the research of pledge theory of real estate income right in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中央民族大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 王利明;;收費權(quán)質(zhì)押的若干問題探討[J];法學(xué)雜志;2007年02期

2 梁慧星;;物權(quán)法草案的若干問題[J];中國法學(xué);2007年01期

3 梁慧星;;物權(quán)法草案第六次審議稿的若干問題[J];比較法研究;2007年01期

4 陳本寒;黃念;;一般債權(quán)質(zhì)押問題之探討——兼評我國《物權(quán)法》(草案)相關(guān)條款之規(guī)定[J];法學(xué)評論;2006年04期

5 李富成;;公共基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施收費權(quán)的法律定性[J];法學(xué);2006年02期

6 梅夏英;收費權(quán)擔(dān)保制度的定性與立法模式選擇[J];法學(xué)雜志;2004年04期

7 梁上上;物權(quán)法定主義:在自由與強制之間[J];法學(xué)研究;2003年03期

8 孫淑云;芻議不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;2003年03期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前1條

1 竇玉梅;;探索于民法中最活躍的領(lǐng)域[N];人民法院報;2000年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 李遙;不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2013年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 樓超蕓;論物權(quán)法背景下不動產(chǎn)收益權(quán)質(zhì)押的法律保護(hù)[D];浙江大學(xué);2011年

2 張平;收費權(quán)質(zhì)押貸款的法律問題研究[D];湖南大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號：1866930