【摘要】：我們將共有分為共同共有和按份共有,隨著社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展,在共有的基本類型中,按份共有出現(xiàn)的情況將越來(lái)越多,在按份共有中如何將自己的應(yīng)有份額處分的問(wèn)題就顯得尤為重要。按份共有中應(yīng)有份額的處分理論性強(qiáng),比較抽象,所以為了將抽象的理論能具體應(yīng)用于實(shí)踐,本文將以案例的方式來(lái)展開論述應(yīng)有份額的處分。該案例主要涉及應(yīng)有份額負(fù)擔(dān)的設(shè)定、應(yīng)有份額轉(zhuǎn)讓及優(yōu)先購(gòu)買權(quán)。所涉及的對(duì)共有物的分割,由于共有物的分割實(shí)際上也就是將其份額分出,所以在本文結(jié)尾將會(huì)有所涉及。其余與應(yīng)有份額處分無(wú)關(guān)的部分案例本文將不再涉及。結(jié)合案例所涉及的問(wèn)題,本文主要研究應(yīng)有份額處分問(wèn)題,第一部分的概述將作簡(jiǎn)單介紹。第一部分是應(yīng)有份額處分概述,是本文的理論基礎(chǔ),主要介紹了按份共有的概念和特征,為下文應(yīng)有份額的處分作理論鋪墊。按份共有中應(yīng)有份額與單獨(dú)的所有權(quán)并無(wú)本質(zhì)上的差別,按份共有不同于分別所有。各共有人的權(quán)利義務(wù)并不局限于其應(yīng)有份額,而是及于共有財(cái)產(chǎn)的全部,應(yīng)有份額是抽象的,并不具體特定,應(yīng)有部分是按份共有人享有權(quán)利的基礎(chǔ)。因此,應(yīng)有份額是其研究的重點(diǎn)。下面的幾章是本文的核心部分,是本文主要討論的問(wèn)題。處分包括法律上的處分和事實(shí)上的處分,因事實(shí)上的處分會(huì)損害其他共有人的利益,所以對(duì)應(yīng)有份額的處分只能是法律上的處份。法律上的處分包括分出、轉(zhuǎn)讓、贈(zèng)與。贈(zèng)與時(shí)其他共有人不享有優(yōu)先購(gòu)買權(quán)。本文將主要論述應(yīng)有份額轉(zhuǎn)讓將產(chǎn)生的優(yōu)先購(gòu)買權(quán)問(wèn)題,包括優(yōu)先購(gòu)買權(quán)概念和性質(zhì)、效力,優(yōu)先購(gòu)買權(quán)的構(gòu)成要件,優(yōu)先購(gòu)買權(quán)的競(jìng)合,優(yōu)先購(gòu)買權(quán)的保護(hù)。應(yīng)有份額的負(fù)擔(dān)設(shè)定,雖然都有爭(zhēng)議,但大多學(xué)者都認(rèn)可可以以應(yīng)有部分設(shè)定抵押,應(yīng)有部分可以設(shè)立權(quán)利質(zhì)權(quán),但不能設(shè)立動(dòng)產(chǎn)質(zhì)權(quán)。多數(shù)學(xué)者認(rèn)為應(yīng)有份額不能單獨(dú)設(shè)立用益物權(quán),筆者贊同該種說(shuō)法。對(duì)應(yīng)有份額也不能出租。最后介紹應(yīng)有份額的拋棄,應(yīng)有份額的拋棄主要涉及拋棄的應(yīng)有份額歸誰(shuí)的問(wèn)題,為維護(hù)交易安全,避免糾紛的發(fā)生,應(yīng)有份額拋棄后應(yīng)歸屬于其他按份共有人所享有。
[Abstract]:We divide shared ownership into common and shared, and with the development of social and economic development, there will be more and more co-ownership in the basic types of shared ownership. The problem of how to deal with one's due share is particularly important. In order to apply abstract theory to practice, this paper will discuss the punishment of due share in the way of case. This case mainly involves the setting of due share burden, due share transfer and preemptive right. Because the division of common things is actually to divide their shares, we will deal with them at the end of this paper. The rest of the cases that have nothing to do with share punishment will not be dealt with in this article. Combined with the problems involved in the case, this paper mainly studies the problem of due share punishment, the first part will give a brief introduction. The first part is the summary of due share punishment, which is the theoretical basis of this paper. It mainly introduces the concept and characteristics of share according to share, which lays a theoretical foundation for the disposition of due share below. There is no essential difference between share per share and individual ownership, and ownership by share is different from separate ownership. The rights and obligations of the co-owners are not limited to their share, but to the whole of the common property. The due share is abstract and not specific, and the proper part is the basis on which the co-owner has the right. Therefore, due share is the focus of its research. The following chapters are the core of this paper, and are the main issues discussed in this paper. Punishment includes legal punishment and de facto punishment, because de facto punishment will harm the interests of other co-owners, so the corresponding share of the punishment can only be a part of the law. Legal sanctions include division, transfer, and gift. The other co-owners shall not enjoy the preemptive right at the time of the grant. This paper will mainly discuss the issue of preemption right which will arise from the transfer of due share, including the concept and nature of preemptive right, the effect, the constituent elements of preemptive right, the competition of preemptive right, and the protection of preemptive right. Although there are controversies in setting the share of the burden, most scholars agree that the mortgage can be set up in part, the pledge of right can be established in part, but the pledge of movable property can not be established. Most scholars think that should share can not set up usufruct right alone, I agree with this view. The corresponding share can not be rented out. Finally, it introduces the abandonment of due share, which mainly involves the problem of who should abandon the share. In order to maintain transaction security and avoid disputes, the abandonment of due share should be owned by other co-owners.
【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】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 房紹坤;;論按份共有人優(yōu)先購(gòu)買權(quán)的適用范圍[J];山東社會(huì)科學(xué);2012年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：2194988