本文選題：物權設立 + 登記操作實踐��； 參考：《蘭州大學》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：2007年10月1日我國《物權法》開始施行后,對因物的歸屬和利用而產生的民事關系進行了大范圍的調整,與其相對應的不動產物權在登記設立方面的法律規(guī)定也有了大幅度的修訂,最引人關注的就是2008年7月1日起《房屋登記辦法》施行后,原來的《城市房屋權屬登記管理辦法》(建設部令第57號)、《建設部關于修改城市房屋權屬登記管理辦法的決定》(建設部令第99號)同時廢止。而在現實的司法操作實踐和房屋登記機構實際工作操作流程中卻出現不少問題,導致房屋真實產權人在經過多次訴訟,用盡各種救濟途徑后仍然不能有效維護自己的合法權益,這個問題在實踐中不時困擾著一線法官,至今仍無明確的答案,在給當事人增加諸多訴累的同時也降低了法院和房地產登記機構的工作效率。 本文共三部分,第一部分,介紹了因為撤銷房屋所有權證書后導致房屋至今仍處于無主狀態(tài)無法辦理房屋所有權證書一案的案情及爭議焦點；第二部分,從我國目前法律框架下不動產物權創(chuàng)設、實際不動產登記操作實踐的角度出發(fā),分析了案件雙方爭議的焦點,對判決和實際登記操作中形成的法律僵局進行分析；第三部分,對類似案件在司法實踐中遇到的困惑進行了歸納和陳述,同時著重提出保留原《城市房屋權屬登記辦法》中糾錯機制合理性的可能性,繼而給出解決類似案件的法律建議。
[Abstract]:On October 1, 2007, after the implementation of the property Law in China, the civil relations arising from the ownership and utilization of the property were adjusted in a wide range. The corresponding legal provisions on the registration and establishment of real estate rights have also been substantially revised. The most interesting thing is that after the implementation of the Housing Registration measures on July 1, 2008, The original "measures for the Registration and Administration of Urban Housing tenure" (decree No. 57 of the Ministry of Construction and the decision of the Ministry of Construction on modifying the methods for the Registration and Administration of Urban Housing tenure) (decree No. 99 of the Ministry of Construction) were annulled at the same time. However, there are many problems in the actual judicial operation practice and the actual operation process of the housing registration organization, which leads to the real property owner of the house still unable to effectively safeguard his legitimate rights and interests after many lawsuits and exhausting all kinds of remedies. This question puzzles the front-line judges from time to time in practice, but there is still no clear answer. It not only adds many lawsuits to the parties, but also reduces the working efficiency of the courts and real estate registration agencies. There are three parts in this paper. The first part introduces the facts of the case and the focus of the dispute that the house is still in the state of no owner and cannot handle the certificate of ownership because of the revocation of the certificate of ownership of the house. From the point of view of the creation of real property right under the current legal framework of our country and the operation practice of real estate registration, this paper analyzes the focus of the dispute between the two parties in the case, and analyzes the legal deadlock formed in the judgment and the actual registration operation; the third part, This paper sums up and states the puzzles encountered in the judicial practice of similar cases, and puts forward the possibility of retaining the rationality of the error-correcting mechanism in the original "Registration method of Urban Housing ownership", and then gives some legal suggestions to solve the similar cases.
【學位授予單位】：蘭州大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D920.5;D923

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 丁佳;;論行政不作為訴訟制度的缺陷與完善[J];成都行政學院學報;2011年01期

2 張定一;如何防范打擊假冒房產交易登記[J];中國房地產;2005年09期

3 曹慧敏;翁國民;;論房產登記中的審查要求[J];中國房地產;2006年05期

4 管建平;沈曉東;;試述房屋登記的三個發(fā)展階段[J];中國房地產;2008年10期

5 王巍冰;宋祖芳;趙君;;買賣合同無效引致的房屋登記效力問題[J];中國房地產;2010年02期

6 曹新德;呂鳴旭;;房屋登記錯誤及其賠償[J];中國房地產;2012年09期

7 沈濤;;房屋登記機構四題[J];中國房地產;2009年06期

8 周運鎳;;淺析依生效法律文書單方申請房屋登記[J];中國房地產;2009年10期

9 崔建遠;;以物抵債的理論與實踐[J];河北法學;2012年03期

10 陳國旺;;我國房地產登記制度的創(chuàng)新與完善——新舊房屋登記辦法比較研究[J];福建工程學院學報;2008年04期

，

本文編號：1806816