本文選題：經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)　切入點(diǎn)：轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議效力　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：經(jīng)濟(jì)適用住房是政府為保障低收入住房困難家庭的居住權(quán)益而提供的安居保障工程，但在實(shí)踐中，一些人卻受利益驅(qū)動，無視經(jīng)濟(jì)適用住房的社會保障性質(zhì)，而以經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)為標(biāo)的物進(jìn)行交易，由此引發(fā)諸多糾紛。由于無論是法律、行政法規(guī)還是國務(wù)院部門規(guī)章、地方政府規(guī)章都未對經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓問題作出明確規(guī)定，因此法院在處理經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓糾紛時作出的判決結(jié)果并不一致。 本文對各地法院審理經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓糾紛所作出的判決進(jìn)行了梳理歸納，總結(jié)出法院判定經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議效力的主要理由，并在歸納總結(jié)的基礎(chǔ)上對法院的有效判定進(jìn)行了反思，通過對轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議所涉公私利益的發(fā)現(xiàn)與衡量，將探討著眼于法院處理經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議的效力問題。除引言外，本文主要分為以下六個部分： 第一部分，分析了我國司法實(shí)踐中法院對經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓的認(rèn)定。指出了對于經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓問題我國立法上的空白以及司法中的混亂認(rèn)定，概括了法院判定經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議效力的主要理由，并分析了法院對經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議作出有效判定時思路上存在的問題。 第二部分，界定了經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)的法律屬性。區(qū)分了容易與經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)相混淆的住宅權(quán)、行政許可以及行政給付等概念，并分析得出經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)是債權(quán)的結(jié)論。 第三部分，介紹了判定合同效力的一般理論。合同當(dāng)事人具備相應(yīng)的民事行為能力、意思表示真實(shí)且合同內(nèi)容不違反法律或者社會公共利益是合同得以生效的一般要件。但有效的合同不僅要具有合法性，同時還要符合社會妥當(dāng)性的要求。 第四部分，對經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議是否違法進(jìn)行了分析。在介紹了判斷合同是否違法的一般理論后，對轉(zhuǎn)讓經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)與轉(zhuǎn)讓購買不滿五年的經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房、轉(zhuǎn)讓預(yù)售商品房進(jìn)行了區(qū)分。得出的結(jié)論是，轉(zhuǎn)讓經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)在性質(zhì)上屬于債權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓，具有合法性。 第五部分，，對經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議是否損害社會公共利益進(jìn)行了分析。具備合法性的合同未必就當(dāng)然有效，其還要接受社會公共利益的最終審查。轉(zhuǎn)讓經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)雖然是指標(biāo)享有人的合同自由，但合同當(dāng)事人行使其自由的行為，違背了《經(jīng)濟(jì)適用住房管理辦法》平衡社會利益分配、減小貧富差距、保障低收入住房困難家庭居住權(quán)益的立法目的。 第六部分，對實(shí)踐中的經(jīng)濟(jì)適用房購買指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓糾紛作出了類型化的分析。在指標(biāo)受讓人符合經(jīng)濟(jì)適用住房申購條件的情況下，指標(biāo)出讓人轉(zhuǎn)讓指標(biāo)的行為沒有影響經(jīng)濟(jì)適用住房制度發(fā)揮其保障低收入住房困難家庭居住權(quán)益的作用，因此，對于該類轉(zhuǎn)讓中合同當(dāng)事人的私人利益，法律應(yīng)當(dāng)予以保護(hù)；在指標(biāo)受讓人不符合經(jīng)濟(jì)適用住房申購條件的情況下，指標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓行為不僅違背了《經(jīng)濟(jì)適用住房管理辦法》平衡社會利益分配、促進(jìn)社會公平的立法目的，而且還加劇了貧富差距，不利于政府對低收入人群的保障，因此，對于此類轉(zhuǎn)讓中指標(biāo)出讓人的合同自由與指標(biāo)受讓人的信賴?yán)妫刹粦?yīng)予以保護(hù)。
[Abstract]:Affordable housing is housing security project in the government to protect the housing difficulties of low-income families living rights provided, but in practice, some people are driven by interests, ignoring the nature of social security housing, and affordable housing purchase index for the subject matter in the transaction, which caused many disputes because. Whether the laws, administrative regulations or the State Council regulations, local government regulations are not on the affordable housing purchase index transfer to make specific provisions, the court in dealing with affordable housing purchase index transfer disputes verdict is not consistent.
This paper made over the court affordable housing purchase index transfer dispute decision summarized, summed up the main reason for the court to purchase affordable housing index transfer agreement, and summarized on the basis of effective judgment on the court was reviewed, by involving the public and private interests of the transfer agreement and discovery the validity of the measure, the court focuses on affordable housing purchase index of the transfer agreement. In addition to the introduction, this paper is mainly divided into the following six parts:
The first part, analysis of China's judicial practice in the courts of affordable housing purchase index transfer. The paper points out that the affordable housing purchase index transfer problem of blank in legislation and judicial confusion in identification, summarizes the court to determine the affordable housing purchase index the main reason for the effectiveness of the transfer agreement, and analyzes the the court judge thought on the problems of affordable housing purchase index transfer agreement.
The second part defines the legal attribute of the purchase index of affordable housing. It distinguishes the concepts of housing right, administrative license and administrative benefit which are easy to be confused with the index of affordable housing purchase, and concludes that the index of the purchase of affordable housing is the conclusion of creditor's rights.
The third part introduces the general theory to determine the validity of contract. The parties to the contract have corresponding capacity for civil conduct, the true meaning and content of the contract does not violate the law or the public interest is the general conditions of contract validity. But the effective contract not only has the legitimacy, but also meet the requirements of social appropriateness.
The fourth part of the affordable housing purchase index transfer agreement is illegal is analyzed. In introduces general theory of determining whether the contract law, the transfer of affordable housing purchase index and purchase of less than five years of affordable housing, the transfer of the pre-sale of commercial housing were distinguished. The conclusion is that the transfer of affordable housing the purchase index in the nature of the assignment of creditor's rights, it is legal.
The fifth part of the affordable housing purchase index transfer agreement does harm the public interests are analyzed. With the legitimacy of the contract is not certainly effective, but also accept the final review of the public interest. The transfer of affordable housing purchase index is the index to enjoy the freedom of contract, but the contract parties to exercise their freedom of behavior. Contrary to the "measures on the management of affordable housing to balance the distribution of social interests, reducing the gap between rich and poor, guarantee the legislative purpose of housing rights and interests of low-income housing for needy families.
The sixth part makes a typological analysis of the practice of affordable housing purchase index transfer disputes. In the index of the transferee in accordance with the purchase of affordable housing conditions, the transferor transfer behavior index index did not affect the economic applicable housing system to play its protection of housing rights and interests of low-income housing for needy families, therefore, for the transfer contract of the party in the private interests, the law should be protected; the index transferee does not comply with the purchase of affordable housing conditions, the transfer behavior not only violates the "index measures on the management of affordable housing to balance the distribution of social interests, promoting the legislation purpose of social justice, but also exacerbated the gap between the rich and the poor, is not conducive to the government guarantee for low-income people so, for such a transfer refers to the freedom of contract and the index marked so that the transferee of the trust interest method Law should not be protected.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D922.29

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 許德風(fēng);;論合同法上信賴?yán)娴母拍罴皩Τ杀举M(fèi)用的損害賠償[J];北大法律評論;2005年01期

2 周杰;;福利國家語境下的“新財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)”理論與相關(guān)制度實(shí)踐分析[J];北大法律評論;2010年02期

3 胡智勇;私法自治與國家強(qiáng)制——法律強(qiáng)制性規(guī)范與無效民事法律行為關(guān)系之分析與構(gòu)建[J];重慶工學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年06期

4 鄭奇;論合同意思自治原則[J];法律適用(國家法官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2001年08期

5 王利明;;論無效合同的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[J];法律適用;2012年07期

6 王軼;;論合同行為的一般生效條件[J];法律適用;2012年07期

7 孫鵬;;論違反強(qiáng)制性規(guī)定行為之效力——兼析《中華人民共和國合同法》第52條第5項(xiàng)的理解與適用[J];法商研究;2006年05期

8 許中緣;;論違反公法規(guī)定對法律行為效力的影響——再評《中華人民共和國合同法》第52條第5項(xiàng)[J];法商研究;2011年01期

9 黃忠;;違法合同的效力判定路徑之辨識[J];法學(xué)家;2010年05期

10 許中緣;;禁止性規(guī)范對民事法律行為效力的影響[J];法學(xué);2010年05期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 馬建平;中國保障性住房制度建設(shè)研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2011年

2 Q糜剿

本文編號：1603592