本文選題：征收權(quán) + 土地規(guī)劃?rùn)?quán)�。� 參考：《華東政法大學(xué)》2010年博士論文

【摘要】：土地征收中的權(quán)力和權(quán)利構(gòu)成中,征收權(quán)和土地規(guī)劃?rùn)?quán)是兩個(gè)公權(quán)力,不動(dòng)產(chǎn)財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)與土地發(fā)展權(quán)是兩個(gè)私權(quán)利。征收權(quán)與不動(dòng)產(chǎn)財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)以及規(guī)劃?rùn)?quán)與土地發(fā)展權(quán)沖突的實(shí)質(zhì)就是公權(quán)力對(duì)私權(quán)利的合法侵犯。這個(gè)“法”即劃定了公權(quán)力的活動(dòng)空間和私權(quán)利的容忍范圍。 征收權(quán)是國(guó)家強(qiáng)制取得財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)的權(quán)力。征收權(quán)的客體是財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)利,包括物權(quán)和債權(quán)、動(dòng)產(chǎn)和不動(dòng)產(chǎn)。土地征收中征收權(quán)與不動(dòng)產(chǎn)財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)的沖突的法律效果是不動(dòng)產(chǎn)財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)變動(dòng),補(bǔ)償請(qǐng)求權(quán)產(chǎn)生,回復(fù)請(qǐng)求權(quán)產(chǎn)生。平衡征收權(quán)與不動(dòng)產(chǎn)財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)的路徑是公共利益要件。應(yīng)該把重點(diǎn)從公益要件的內(nèi)容范圍轉(zhuǎn)移到確認(rèn)公共利益的方法與程序上來(lái)。 土地規(guī)劃?rùn)?quán)是國(guó)家對(duì)土地利用行為進(jìn)行限制的權(quán)力。土地發(fā)展權(quán)是私權(quán),是獨(dú)立的財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán),在大陸法上是區(qū)分地上權(quán)。土地規(guī)劃?rùn)?quán)與土地發(fā)展權(quán)沖突的法律效果是土地發(fā)展權(quán)必須容忍而且沒(méi)有補(bǔ)償,但是如果超出必要的限度就必須補(bǔ)償,在這個(gè)意義上就構(gòu)成管制性征收。在實(shí)踐中有司法界分法、私權(quán)內(nèi)部規(guī)范法、補(bǔ)償替代機(jī)制包括TDR、私人協(xié)議等平衡路徑。 我國(guó)土地征收中征收權(quán)與不動(dòng)產(chǎn)財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)的沖突中,雖然立法中有公益要件,但實(shí)踐中公益要件被虛置甚至變異。我國(guó)土地規(guī)劃?rùn)?quán)全部為行政權(quán),致使規(guī)劃的公益擔(dān)保受到質(zhì)疑。我國(guó)的農(nóng)村集體土地發(fā)展權(quán)被有意的制度安排給剝奪和征收了,我國(guó)特有的補(bǔ)償替代機(jī)制是指標(biāo)的轉(zhuǎn)讓。因此我國(guó)的平衡路徑應(yīng)該是尋求法治的保障。我國(guó)應(yīng)該確立法治國(guó)的比例原則,借鑒區(qū)段征收、市地重劃以及鞏固成都實(shí)驗(yàn)的成果,運(yùn)用比例原則來(lái)平衡土地征收中的權(quán)力和權(quán)利。我國(guó)還應(yīng)該建立和完善公眾參與,從程序要件中平衡土地征收中的權(quán)力和權(quán)利。
[Abstract]:In the power and constitution of land expropriation, expropriation right and land planning right are two public rights, real estate property right and land development right are two private rights.The essence of the conflict between expropriation right, real estate property right and planning right and land development right is the legal infringement of private right by public power.This Act defines the scope of public power and the tolerance of private rights.The right of expropriation is the power of the state to impose property rights.The object of expropriation right is property right, including real right and creditor's right, movable property and immovable property.The legal effect of the conflict between expropriation right and real estate property right in land expropriation is the change of real estate property right, the emergence of compensation claim right and the emergence of reply claim right.The path of balancing expropriation right and real estate property right is an important element of public interest.The emphasis should be shifted from the content scope of public welfare elements to the method and procedure of recognizing public interest.The right of land planning is the power of the state to restrict the behavior of land use.Land development right is private right and independent property right.The legal effect of the conflict between the land planning right and the land development right is that the land development right must be tolerated and not compensated, but if it exceeds the necessary limit, it must be compensated. In this sense, it constitutes a regulatory expropriation.In practice, there are judicial division law, private right internal standard law, compensation substitution mechanism including TDRand private agreement and other balanced paths.In the conflict between expropriation right and real estate property right in land expropriation in our country, although there are commonweal elements in legislation, in practice the commonweal elements are fictitious or even varied.The right of land planning in our country is all administrative power, which makes the public welfare guarantee of planning questionable.The rural collective land development right in our country has been deprived and expropriated by the systematic arrangement. The special compensation substitution mechanism in China is the transfer of the index.Therefore, the balanced path of our country should be to seek the guarantee of rule of law.Our country should establish the proportional principle of ruling the country by law, draw lessons from the section expropriation, redraw the city land and consolidate the achievements of Chengdu experiment, and use the proportional principle to balance the power and right in the land expropriation.China should also establish and perfect public participation and balance the rights and powers in land expropriation from the procedural elements.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：D922.181;D922.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉雯波;;我國(guó)土地發(fā)展權(quán)研究現(xiàn)狀[J];安徽農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué);2009年19期

2 陳超群;;失地農(nóng)民知情權(quán)的法律保護(hù)[J];滄桑;2005年06期

3 文超祥;走向平衡——經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化背景下城市規(guī)劃法比較研究[J];城市規(guī)劃;2003年05期

4 張曉玲;;對(duì)城市建設(shè)拆遷中土地制度的思考[J];城市規(guī)劃;2006年02期

5 田莉;;城市規(guī)劃的“公共利益”之辯——《物權(quán)法》實(shí)施的影響與啟示[J];城市規(guī)劃;2010年01期

6 馬嶺;憲法性法律的性質(zhì)界定[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年01期

7 王利明;;空間權(quán):一種新型的財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)利[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2007年02期

8 劉國(guó)臻;;論美國(guó)的土地發(fā)展權(quán)制度及其對(duì)我國(guó)的啟示[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2007年03期

9 劉國(guó)臻;;論英國(guó)土地發(fā)展權(quán)制度及其對(duì)我國(guó)的啟示[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2008年04期

10 康媛;霍迎;;借鑒英國(guó)土地發(fā)展權(quán)重設(shè)我國(guó)土地權(quán)利體系[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年34期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 蔡玉梅;張曉玲;張文新;;英國(guó)城鄉(xiāng)規(guī)劃的演變及對(duì)我國(guó)國(guó)土規(guī)劃啟示[A];中國(guó)地質(zhì)礦產(chǎn)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)會(huì)資源經(jīng)濟(jì)與規(guī)劃專業(yè)委員會(huì)2006學(xué)術(shù)交流會(huì)資料匯編[C];2006年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前2條

1 莫于川;[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2004年

2 本報(bào)記者 歐陽(yáng)晶　通訊員 徐紅平;[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2010年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 高漢;集體產(chǎn)權(quán)制度下的農(nóng)地征用[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2005年

2 梁國(guó)啟;我國(guó)城市規(guī)劃法律制度研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2008年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 粟慶斌;我國(guó)土地發(fā)展權(quán)法律問(wèn)題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2005年

2 孫彥偉;城市總體規(guī)劃與土地利用總體規(guī)劃協(xié)調(diào)研究[D];華中農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué);2005年

，

本文編號(hào)：1746373