【摘要】：隨著限購政策的推進(jìn),實(shí)踐中借名購房爭(zhēng)議的案件涌現(xiàn)。借名購房關(guān)系區(qū)別于借款買房關(guān)系、委托買房關(guān)系,其認(rèn)定需具備借名買房合同、實(shí)際出資人、房屋居住狀況、房產(chǎn)證持有狀況等綜合因素認(rèn)定。認(rèn)定為借名購房關(guān)系,借名人基于合同的轉(zhuǎn)移登記請(qǐng)求權(quán)是否能得到支持,還需要進(jìn)一步認(rèn)定合同的效力。借名人或出名人能否確認(rèn)物權(quán)或申請(qǐng)物權(quán)保護(hù),除認(rèn)定合同效力外,還需考慮事實(shí)物權(quán)與法律物權(quán)的關(guān)系,考慮我國(guó)物權(quán)的登記制度。本文主要通過案例分析、法理分析、法律后果分析等,認(rèn)為判定借名購買商品房的合同是否違反公共利益應(yīng)分情況討論,不應(yīng)一概而論。在合同有效前提下,在出名人基于物權(quán)請(qǐng)求返還占有時(shí),法院應(yīng)根據(jù)借名人才系房屋真實(shí)權(quán)利人,而不予支持出名人請(qǐng)求。在借名人請(qǐng)求確認(rèn)所有權(quán)時(shí),法院也不應(yīng)直接判定該房屋產(chǎn)權(quán)歸借名人所有,借名人并不為房屋真實(shí)權(quán)利人,應(yīng)釋明借名人另行起訴房屋轉(zhuǎn)移登記的要求。
[Abstract]:With the promotion of the purchase restriction policy, the practice of borrowing name purchase dispute cases emerged. The relationship between borrowing and buying a house is different from the relationship of borrowing and buying a house, and the relationship of entrusting a house should be determined by comprehensive factors, such as the contract of borrowing a house, the actual investor, the living condition of a house, the holding condition of a real estate certificate, and so on. It is necessary to confirm the validity of the contract if the claim for transfer registration based on the contract can be supported or not. In order to confirm real right or apply for real right protection, we should consider the relationship between factual real right and legal real right, and the registration system of real right in our country. This article mainly through the case analysis, the legal theory analysis, the legal consequence analysis and so on, thinks that the judgment to borrow the name purchase the commercial house contract whether violates the public interest to be discussed, should not generalize. On the premise that the contract is valid, the court should not support the claim of the celebrity according to the fact that the celebrity is the real owner of the house, when the celebrity claims to return possession on the basis of the property right. When requesting confirmation of ownership by celebrity, the court should not directly decide that the property right of the house is owned by the borrowed celebrity, and that the celebrity is not the real owner of the house, and should explain the request of the celebrity to sue separately for the transfer registration of the house.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D923.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王利明;;構(gòu)建統(tǒng)一的不動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)公示制度——評(píng)《不動(dòng)產(chǎn)登記暫行條例(征求意見稿)》[J];政治與法律;2014年12期

2 趙秀梅;;借名登記合同中的法律問題[J];國(guó)家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2014年05期

3 馬強(qiáng);;借名購房案件所涉問題之研究——以法院裁判的案件為中心[J];政治與法律;2014年07期

4 楊興培;周愛萍;;擅自出售登記于自己名下他人房產(chǎn)的行為定性[J];法治研究;2014年04期

5 冉克平;;論借名實(shí)施法律行為的效果[J];法學(xué);2014年02期

6 林誠(chéng)二;;不動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)變動(dòng)登記之實(shí)與虛——以我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)借名登記契約之相關(guān)問題為說明[J];北方法學(xué);2014年01期

7 王逸軒;;限購令下借名購房行為的性質(zhì)——兩大法系下代理制度的視角[J];法制博覽(中旬刊);2013年10期

8 周峰;李興;;隱名購房行為的法律性質(zhì)認(rèn)定與執(zhí)法對(duì)策研究[J];法律適用;2012年08期

9 蔣光輝;;借名購買經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房之歸屬[J];人民司法;2012年15期

10 李德通;;規(guī)避限購令之借名購房行為的性質(zhì)與效力探討[J];法治研究;2012年04期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 陳益鳳;借名購房糾紛案件的法律適用研究[D];浙江大學(xué);2013年

2 張麗燕;房產(chǎn)借名登記及其法律問題研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：2394640