【摘要】：我國(guó)《物權(quán)法》調(diào)整基于物之歸屬與利用產(chǎn)生的法律關(guān)系,它的實(shí)施對(duì)我國(guó)社會(huì)主義市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)的健康發(fā)展和民事權(quán)利的確認(rèn)與保護(hù)發(fā)揮著巨大作用,并且通過(guò)專節(jié)構(gòu)建了不動(dòng)產(chǎn)登記制度,建立包括異議登記、更正登記、錯(cuò)誤登記法律救濟(jì)在內(nèi)的完整體系,明確了登記錯(cuò)誤時(shí)的申請(qǐng)人與登記機(jī)構(gòu)的損害賠償責(zé)任,體現(xiàn)了注重權(quán)利保護(hù)的法律觀念。然而,《物權(quán)法》僅在21條規(guī)定了登記錯(cuò)誤應(yīng)承擔(dān)損害賠償責(zé)任,該規(guī)定過(guò)于原則化,對(duì)于責(zé)任的性質(zhì)、歸責(zé)原則、賠償范圍等具體操作問(wèn)題未作明確說(shuō)明,《不動(dòng)產(chǎn)登記暫行條例》對(duì)這些問(wèn)題也未作具體回應(yīng),有鑒于此,本文以不動(dòng)產(chǎn)登記為核心,以不動(dòng)產(chǎn)登記錯(cuò)誤為基點(diǎn),分析登記錯(cuò)誤損害賠償存在的實(shí)踐問(wèn)題以及理論爭(zhēng)鳴,包括責(zé)任性質(zhì)、責(zé)任構(gòu)成和責(zé)任形態(tài),在此基礎(chǔ)上探討損害賠償責(zé)任的實(shí)現(xiàn)及保障制度。本文由五部分構(gòu)成:第一部分通過(guò)從立法以及實(shí)務(wù)兩個(gè)層面分析現(xiàn)階段我國(guó)登記錯(cuò)誤損害賠償?shù)默F(xiàn)狀,并由多宗案例總結(jié)了損害賠償出現(xiàn)的困境,包括責(zé)任性質(zhì)之爭(zhēng)以及訴訟模式之爭(zhēng)。第二部分著重分析了我國(guó)登記錯(cuò)誤損害賠償?shù)呢?zé)任性質(zhì)。首先通過(guò)對(duì)不動(dòng)產(chǎn)登記性質(zhì)的四種比較討論,明確了私法行為說(shuō)更符合我國(guó)現(xiàn)狀;其次簡(jiǎn)要論述了不動(dòng)產(chǎn)錯(cuò)誤登記損害賠償?shù)膬?nèi)涵及在我國(guó)法律框架之下造成錯(cuò)誤登記的情形;再次在上述兩點(diǎn)的理論鋪墊下通過(guò)對(duì)損害賠償責(zé)任性質(zhì)的國(guó)家賠償責(zé)任說(shuō)和民事賠償責(zé)任說(shuō)的對(duì)比論證,主張將其界定為民事賠償責(zé)任說(shuō)更符合我國(guó)法理及現(xiàn)實(shí)需要。并明確由此引發(fā)的訴訟應(yīng)提起民事訴訟為宜。第三部分通過(guò)對(duì)歸責(zé)原則的論述認(rèn)為將損害賠償責(zé)任確定為過(guò)錯(cuò)責(zé)任更具有正當(dāng)性,在此種觀點(diǎn)的支撐之下論述了損害賠償責(zé)任的構(gòu)成要件,即侵權(quán)行為、損害事實(shí)、因果關(guān)系和主觀上的過(guò)錯(cuò)四要件。第四部分是本文的重點(diǎn)所在,通過(guò)對(duì)比分析登記錯(cuò)誤損害賠償?shù)牟煌?zé)任形態(tài)的主張,包括連帶責(zé)任、補(bǔ)充責(zé)任、不真正連帶責(zé)任及按份責(zé)任,從而確定了申請(qǐng)人與登記機(jī)構(gòu)分別侵權(quán)行為下承擔(dān)的應(yīng)為按份責(zé)任形態(tài)。第五部分,對(duì)不動(dòng)產(chǎn)登記錯(cuò)誤損害賠償責(zé)任的保障機(jī)制提出設(shè)想。從登記制度本身來(lái)看加強(qiáng)登記人員的職業(yè)化,在事前防范登記錯(cuò)誤的發(fā)生,從事后彌補(bǔ)角度考慮,鑒于我國(guó)國(guó)情,商業(yè)保險(xiǎn)和基金制度發(fā)展趨于普遍,引入賠償基金制和責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)制二元制度確保受害人的權(quán)利得到及時(shí)足額的救濟(jì),同時(shí)保證社會(huì)正常發(fā)展。本文通過(guò)對(duì)不動(dòng)產(chǎn)登記錯(cuò)誤賠償責(zé)任的分析和論述,以期能夠?yàn)槲覈?guó)不動(dòng)產(chǎn)登記錯(cuò)誤賠償責(zé)任制度的完善有些許幫助。
[Abstract]:The property Law of our country adjusts the legal relationship based on the ownership and utilization of the property, and its implementation plays a great role in the healthy development of the socialist market economy and the recognition and protection of civil rights in our country. And through the special section of the real estate registration system, the establishment of a complete system, including dissent registration, correction registration, false registration legal relief, clear registration of the applicant and registration agencies when the damage compensation liability. It embodies the legal concept of paying attention to the protection of rights. However, the property Law only stipulates in Article 21 that the registration error shall be liable for damages. This provision is too principled and imputes the principle of liability for the nature of liability. The scope of compensation and other specific operational issues have not been clearly explained, and the Provisional regulations on Real Estate Registration have not made a specific response to these problems. In view of this, this paper regards real estate registration as the core and real estate registration errors as its base point. This paper analyzes the practical problems and theoretical contentions in the compensation for damages caused by registration errors, including the nature of liability, the constitution of liability and the form of liability, on the basis of which the realization and protection system of liability for damages are discussed. This paper is composed of five parts: the first part analyzes the current situation of the registration error compensation in our country from the legislative and practical aspects, and summarizes the plight of the damage compensation by many cases. Including the dispute of the nature of responsibility and the dispute of litigation mode. The second part focuses on the analysis of the nature of liability for registration error damages in China. First of all, through four comparative discussions on the nature of real estate registration, the author clarifies that the theory of private law acts is more in line with the present situation of our country, and then briefly discusses the connotation of compensation for damages caused by real estate misregistration and the situation of causing false registration under the legal framework of our country. Thirdly, under the above two theories, the author argues that the theory of civil liability is more in line with the legal theory and the practical need of our country by comparing the theory of state liability and the theory of civil liability of the nature of the liability for damages. And make it clear that the litigation should be initiated civil action is appropriate. The third part considers that it is more legitimate to determine the liability for damages as fault liability by discussing the principle of liability imputation. Under the support of this viewpoint, the author discusses the constitutive elements of liability for damages, that is, tort, the fact of damage. Causality and subjective fault. The fourth part is the focus of this paper, through comparative analysis of the different forms of liability for registration error damage claims, including joint liability, supplementary liability, non-genuine joint and several liability and share liability, Thus, the applicant and the registration institution should bear the form of liability according to the share under the respective tort behavior of the applicant and the registration institution. The fifth part, puts forward the assumption to the safeguard mechanism of the real estate registration error compensation liability. From the point of view of the registration system itself, we should strengthen the professionalization of registration personnel, guard against the occurrence of registration errors in advance, and consider from the point of view of making up afterwards. In view of the national conditions of our country, the development of commercial insurance and fund systems tends to be widespread. The dual system of compensation fund system and liability insurance system is introduced to ensure the rights of victims to receive timely and full relief, and to ensure the normal development of society. Through the analysis and discussion on the liability of compensation for immovable property registration errors, this paper hopes to be of some help to the perfection of the system of compensation for false registration of real estate in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李桂星;;人身觸電損害賠償責(zé)任的認(rèn)定[J];農(nóng)村電工;2006年11期

2 高興祖;關(guān)于日本對(duì)亞洲各國(guó)受害者的損害賠償責(zé)任[J];南京社會(huì)科學(xué);1996年08期

3 王曉,楊洪星,高揚(yáng);公共體育場(chǎng)所損害賠償責(zé)任初探[J];體育與科學(xué);2003年06期

4 焦軒;雇員遇車禍死亡 雇主承擔(dān)損害賠償責(zé)任[J];道路交通管理;2003年02期

5 楊海涌;論離婚過(guò)錯(cuò)損害賠償責(zé)任[J];求索;2003年05期

6 王玉輝;;串通招投標(biāo)損害賠償責(zé)任研究[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)輯刊;2007年03期

7 龍翼飛;魏振瀛;梁書文;江偉;孫曉莉;;旅館住宿遭毆打 誰(shuí)應(yīng)承擔(dān)損害賠償責(zé)任[J];商品與質(zhì)量;2007年23期

8 韓文;;論機(jī)動(dòng)車損害賠償責(zé)任的雙重性質(zhì)[J];中國(guó)商界(下半月);2010年06期

9 張駿;;反壟斷損害賠償責(zé)任研究[J];南通大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年01期

10 楊立新;王麗莎;;錯(cuò)誤出生的損害賠償責(zé)任及適當(dāng)限制[J];北方法學(xué);2011年02期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前4條

1 匡小明;;論我國(guó)生態(tài)損害賠償責(zé)任的司法量化[A];生態(tài)安全與環(huán)境風(fēng)險(xiǎn)防范法治建設(shè)——2011年全國(guó)環(huán)境資源法學(xué)研討會(huì)（年會(huì)）論文集（第一冊(cè)）[C];2011年

2 張林鴻;王蜀黔;;高度危險(xiǎn)作業(yè)的損害賠償責(zé)任與責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)[A];第二屆貴州法學(xué)論壇文集[C];2001年

3 李秀雅;梁文婷;朱慧;李希昆;;論農(nóng)村水環(huán)境污染的損害賠償責(zé)任[A];水污染防治立法和循環(huán)經(jīng)濟(jì)立法研究——2005年全國(guó)環(huán)境資源法學(xué)研討會(huì)論文集（第一冊(cè)）[C];2005年

4 簡(jiǎn)資修;;醫(yī)師的損害賠償責(zé)任與說(shuō)明義務(wù)——合約理論與臺(tái)灣經(jīng)驗(yàn)[A];2008年度（第六屆）中國(guó)法經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)論壇論文集（上）[C];2008年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 中國(guó)社科院法學(xué)所副研究員、法學(xué)博士 于 敏;機(jī)動(dòng)車損害賠償責(zé)任與法律公平的實(shí)現(xiàn)[N];人民法院報(bào);2004年

2 陳新華;機(jī)動(dòng)車損害賠償責(zé)任主體的界定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2008年

3 中國(guó)核保險(xiǎn)共同體執(zhí)行機(jī)構(gòu) 左惠強(qiáng)　顧頌;我國(guó)亟需建立健全核損害賠償責(zé)任法律制度(上)[N];中國(guó)保險(xiǎn)報(bào);2011年

4 ;被盜機(jī)動(dòng)車肇事后由誰(shuí)承擔(dān)損害賠償責(zé)任？[N];西部時(shí)報(bào);2007年

5 本報(bào)法律組;被盜車輛肇事，，車主應(yīng)承擔(dān)損害賠償責(zé)任嗎[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2002年

6 郭麗軍;核損害賠償責(zé)任立法及保障淺析[N];中國(guó)保險(xiǎn)報(bào);2011年

7 本報(bào)記者 張媛;廢止航空運(yùn)輸損害賠償責(zé)任限額[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2013年

8 韓 琳;定金責(zé)任與損害賠償責(zé)任能否同時(shí)適用[N];人民法院報(bào);2004年

9 中國(guó)社科院法學(xué)所研究員、法學(xué)博士 于 敏;機(jī)動(dòng)車損害賠償責(zé)任及其保險(xiǎn)的法律適用[N];人民法院報(bào);2006年

10 聶焱晶 西北政法大學(xué) 法學(xué)學(xué)士;收入錢財(cái) 為人消災(zāi)[N];衛(wèi)生與生活報(bào);2006年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 Q糜剿

本文編號(hào)：2218911