本文關(guān)鍵詞：住宅小區(qū)車位、車庫(kù)權(quán)屬問(wèn)題分析　出處：《吉林大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 住宅小區(qū) 小區(qū)的車位 小區(qū)的車庫(kù) 所有權(quán)

【摘要】：《物權(quán)法》及司法解釋的出臺(tái)，使小區(qū)車庫(kù)、車位的所有權(quán)歸屬界定逐漸清晰明確，有利于定紛止?fàn)�，維護(hù)社會(huì)穩(wěn)定，但是《物權(quán)法》作出的規(guī)定僅提供了一種框架，過(guò)于原則，相關(guān)的司法解釋和法律制度不夠細(xì)化完善，因此法院在司法實(shí)踐中面臨很多的困難，難以操作。 本文基于以上立法背景，采用比較分析法、價(jià)值分析法和圖表法的研究方法，，對(duì)我國(guó)車位、車庫(kù)權(quán)屬問(wèn)題進(jìn)行分析和論述。首先，對(duì)我國(guó)住宅小區(qū)車位、車庫(kù)權(quán)屬問(wèn)題的概述。當(dāng)前我國(guó)車位、車庫(kù)的類型多種多樣，本文僅討論住宅小區(qū)車位、車庫(kù)的權(quán)屬問(wèn)題，目前學(xué)術(shù)界對(duì)于住宅小區(qū)的車位、車庫(kù)的權(quán)屬問(wèn)題的觀點(diǎn)不一，主要有：業(yè)主共有說(shuō)、約定歸屬說(shuō)和面積分?jǐn)傉f(shuō)。我國(guó)《物權(quán)法》第74條采用了約定歸屬說(shuō)，但是在我國(guó)目前市場(chǎng)環(huán)境下，業(yè)主和開(kāi)發(fā)商外表看似平等協(xié)商，實(shí)質(zhì)上卻是單個(gè)業(yè)主處于弱勢(shì)地位，與強(qiáng)大開(kāi)發(fā)商進(jìn)行談判議價(jià)的空間很小，筆者通過(guò)對(duì)專有權(quán)和共有權(quán)的研究，提出車位、車庫(kù)歸屬的見(jiàn)解。其次，比較和借鑒國(guó)外主要國(guó)家及中國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)關(guān)于車位、車庫(kù)權(quán)屬的立法。在美國(guó)、德國(guó)、日本、法國(guó)、加拿大多倫多市以及我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)的立法中，通過(guò)比較分析發(fā)現(xiàn)，臺(tái)灣地區(qū)在立法中明確設(shè)定“法定停車位”以及德國(guó)在立法中明確獨(dú)立車庫(kù)權(quán)屬，可為我國(guó)今后的立法研究提供方向。但是各國(guó)立法都是在考慮本國(guó)發(fā)展情況、生活習(xí)慣、人口數(shù)量等因素的基礎(chǔ)上進(jìn)行的，在解決我國(guó)小區(qū)車位、車庫(kù)權(quán)屬問(wèn)題時(shí)，應(yīng)結(jié)合我國(guó)實(shí)際人口眾多、土地資源稀缺的國(guó)情進(jìn)行立法構(gòu)建。最后，車位、車庫(kù)權(quán)屬問(wèn)題的立法完善，在對(duì)《物權(quán)法》74條的完善建議上：第一，應(yīng)該明確“應(yīng)當(dāng)首先滿足業(yè)主需要”、“其他場(chǎng)地”的含義；第二，應(yīng)該明確當(dāng)事人未進(jìn)行約定或約定不明確時(shí)車位、車庫(kù)的歸屬。單靠《物權(quán)法》的相關(guān)規(guī)定還不足以解決小區(qū)車位、車庫(kù)的權(quán)屬問(wèn)題，需要從完善不動(dòng)產(chǎn)物權(quán)統(tǒng)一登記制度、房地產(chǎn)信息公開(kāi)制度、物業(yè)管理團(tuán)體職能等方面進(jìn)行配合，配套制度和法律規(guī)定緊密銜接、有效配合，真正達(dá)到維護(hù)小區(qū)業(yè)主權(quán)益之目的。
[Abstract]:With the introduction of the property Law and the judicial interpretation, the ownership of garage and parking spaces in the residential area is defined clearly and clearly, which is conducive to the settlement of disputes and the maintenance of social stability. However, the provisions of the Real right Law only provide a framework, which is too principled, and the relevant judicial interpretation and legal system are not detailed and perfect. Therefore, the court is faced with many difficulties in judicial practice, which is difficult to operate. Based on the above legislative background, this paper uses comparative analysis, value analysis and chart method to analyze and discuss the parking spaces and garage ownership in China. Firstly, the parking spaces in residential areas in China are analyzed and discussed. At present, there are many kinds of parking spaces in our country. This paper only discusses the parking spaces in residential areas and the ownership of garages. At present, the academic circles are concerned with the parking spaces in residential areas. There are different views on the ownership of garage, mainly: the owner's co-ownership theory, the agreement ownership theory and the area allocation theory. Article 74 of the property Law of our country adopts the agreement ownership theory, but under the present market environment of our country. Owners and developers look like equal negotiations, but in fact, individual owners are in a weak position, and powerful developers have little room to negotiate and negotiate prices. The author puts forward parking spaces through the study of exclusive rights and co-ownership. Second, the comparison and reference of foreign countries and Taiwan about parking space, garage ownership legislation. In the United States, Germany, Japan, France. In the legislation of Toronto, Canada and Taiwan, it is found that the statutory parking space is clearly established in the legislation of Taiwan and that the right of independent garage ownership is clearly defined in the legislation of Germany. It can provide the direction for the future legislative research of our country. However, the legislation of all countries is based on the consideration of the development of their own country, living habits, population and other factors, in the solution of parking spaces in residential areas in our country. Garage ownership should be combined with the actual population of our country, the scarcity of land resources for legislative construction. Finally, parking space, garage ownership legislation. In the "property Law" 74 to improve the recommendations: first, should be clear that "should first meet the needs of the owners", "other venues" meaning; Second, it should be clear that the parties have not agreed or the agreement is not clear when the parking space, garage ownership. Relying solely on the relevant provisions of the "property Law" is not enough to solve the residential parking spaces, garage ownership. We need to perfect the real estate property registration system, real estate information disclosure system, property management group functions and other aspects of cooperation, supporting systems and legal provisions are closely linked, effective coordination. Truly achieve the purpose of safeguarding the rights and interests of the owners of the district.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉閱春;;論小區(qū)停車位及車庫(kù)的歸屬——兼議對(duì)《物權(quán)法》第74條規(guī)定的理解[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2007年05期

2 王榮珍;;對(duì)《物權(quán)法》車位權(quán)屬規(guī)則的檢視與完善[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2011年01期

3 張柳青;張朝陽(yáng);;物業(yè)管理糾紛審理中的若干法律問(wèn)題[J];法律適用;2006年11期

4 趙秀梅;;土地上下空間使用權(quán)問(wèn)題的思考[J];法學(xué)雜志;2008年05期

5 高圣平;;住宅小區(qū)車位、車庫(kù)的性質(zhì)及其權(quán)利歸屬研究——兼評(píng)《物權(quán)法》第74條[J];法學(xué)家;2008年06期

6 董學(xué)立;;論物權(quán)法上車庫(kù)權(quán)屬的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[J];法學(xué);2008年03期

7 高圣平;;“首先滿足業(yè)主的需要”的規(guī)范意義——《物權(quán)法》第74條第1款的理解與適用[J];法學(xué);2009年02期

8 黃有麗;;小區(qū)地下車庫(kù)權(quán)屬的法律認(rèn)定[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年24期

9 楊軍;;業(yè)主委員會(huì)法律地位分析[J];法制與社會(huì);2010年01期

10 劉長(zhǎng)森;論業(yè)主委員會(huì)的性質(zhì)及法律地位[J];中國(guó)房地產(chǎn);2002年05期

本文編號(hào)：1384696