本文選題：分時(shí)度假 + 用益物權(quán)�。� 參考：《華東政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：分時(shí)度假起源于上世紀(jì)60年代的歐洲，在之后的幾十年里逐漸成為全球范圍內(nèi)的休閑度假方式。90年代初，分時(shí)度假進(jìn)入中國市場(chǎng)，首先登陸在海南、福建等地。然而，分時(shí)度假在中國卻飽受質(zhì)疑，甚至在央視315晚會(huì)上遭到點(diǎn)名批評(píng)，遠(yuǎn)沒有達(dá)到推動(dòng)房地產(chǎn)行業(yè)和旅游行業(yè)的初衷。 總體來看，分時(shí)度假之所以在中國水土不服，原因主要有四：一是20世紀(jì)末的國內(nèi)市場(chǎng)并沒有達(dá)到足夠成熟度；二是缺少相應(yīng)的行業(yè)規(guī)范規(guī)制從業(yè)人員和相關(guān)公司；三是相關(guān)產(chǎn)品設(shè)計(jì)和理論研究沒有跟上位；四是缺少明確的法律法規(guī)導(dǎo)致整個(gè)流程缺少相關(guān)法律依據(jù)。分時(shí)度假產(chǎn)品本身沒有問題，只要立法機(jī)關(guān)根據(jù)國情，借鑒國外先進(jìn)經(jīng)驗(yàn)，制定出合適的法律法規(guī)，，相信分時(shí)度假在中國會(huì)有廣闊的市場(chǎng)前景。 本文羅列并分析了國內(nèi)外對(duì)于分時(shí)度假的定義，結(jié)合其在中國的現(xiàn)狀，在借鑒國外先進(jìn)立法的基礎(chǔ)上，對(duì)分時(shí)度假權(quán)利的法律性質(zhì)進(jìn)行了分析，并對(duì)我國分時(shí)度假立法提出了一些建議。除去引言及結(jié)語，本文共分為四章，約兩萬四千字。 第一章是對(duì)于分時(shí)度假概述并大致介紹、分析了分時(shí)度假在中國的現(xiàn)狀。首先從分時(shí)度假的定義出發(fā)，結(jié)合國內(nèi)外的觀點(diǎn)，對(duì)于分時(shí)度假這一產(chǎn)品有了一個(gè)初步的闡述，隨后對(duì)于分時(shí)度假在中國的狀況進(jìn)行了分析，結(jié)合出現(xiàn)的矛盾說明本文的寫作目的。 第二章中比較了歐盟、英國、美國等西方先進(jìn)國家對(duì)于分時(shí)度假的立法。介紹各國立法之后再總結(jié)并分析各自的優(yōu)劣，以期達(dá)到對(duì)我國分時(shí)度假立法借鑒作用。 第三章為分時(shí)度假對(duì)傳統(tǒng)物權(quán)理論的挑戰(zhàn)與發(fā)展。作者結(jié)合物權(quán)三大原則和所有權(quán)的三個(gè)特征，逐一分析分時(shí)度假對(duì)于它們的挑戰(zhàn)與發(fā)展，闡明分時(shí)度假作為一種新的產(chǎn)品對(duì)傳統(tǒng)物權(quán)理論是挑戰(zhàn)更是發(fā)展，強(qiáng)調(diào)在以后的立法過程中將分時(shí)度假納入物權(quán)體系的重要性。 第四章對(duì)分時(shí)度假權(quán)利的法律性質(zhì)進(jìn)行了探討。本章中，首先將學(xué)界的一些主流觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了闡述和分析，然后結(jié)合案例分析分時(shí)度假權(quán)利的主體、客體和內(nèi)容等等對(duì)于分時(shí)度假權(quán)利的法律性質(zhì)進(jìn)行分析，得出結(jié)論認(rèn)為社會(huì)實(shí)踐中分時(shí)度假大多是債權(quán)模式，但物權(quán)模式下的用益物權(quán)模式對(duì)于分時(shí)度假更為合適的結(jié)論。最后結(jié)合國外立法對(duì)我國分時(shí)度假立法提出一些建議。
[Abstract]:Timeshare originated in Europe in the 1960s. In the following decades, it gradually became a global leisure vacation in the early 1990s, time-sharing vacation entered the Chinese market, first landed in Hainan, Fujian and other places. However, timeshare has been questioned in China, and even criticized at the CCTV 315 party, far from the original purpose of promoting the real estate industry and the tourism industry. Overall, timesharing is not acceptable in China. The main reasons are as follows: first, the domestic market did not reach enough maturity at the end of the 20th century; second, the lack of relevant industry regulation staff and related companies; third, the related product design and theoretical research did not keep up with the position; Fourth, the lack of clear laws and regulations lead to the lack of relevant legal basis for the whole process. There is no problem with timesharing products per se, so long as the legislature draws up appropriate laws and regulations according to the national conditions and foreign advanced experience. It is believed that timeshare will have a broad market prospect in China. This paper lists and analyzes the definition of timeshare at home and abroad, combined with its current situation in China, on the basis of drawing lessons from foreign advanced legislation. This paper analyzes the legal nature of the right of timeshare and puts forward some suggestions on the legislation of timeshare in our country. Apart from the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into four chapters, about 24000 words. The first chapter is an overview of timeshare and a general introduction, and analyzes the current situation of timeshare in China. Starting from the definition of timeshare and combining the domestic and foreign viewpoints, this paper gives a preliminary exposition on the product of timeshare, and then analyzes the situation of timeshare in China. The second chapter compares the legislation of the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States and other advanced western countries on timesharing. After introducing the legislation of various countries, the author summarizes and analyzes their merits and demerits in order to provide reference for the legislation of timeshare in our country. Chapter three is about the challenge and development of timeshare to the traditional theory of real right. Combining the three principles of real right and the three characteristics of ownership, the author analyzes the challenge and development of timeshare to them one by one, and expounds that timeshare, as a new product, is a challenge to the traditional theory of real right. The author emphasizes the importance of bringing timeshare into the real right system in the later legislative process. Chapter four discusses the legal nature of timeshare right. In this chapter, the author first expounds and analyzes some mainstream viewpoints of academic circles, and then analyzes the legal nature of timeshare right by case study, such as subject, object and content, etc. The conclusion is that timesharing is mostly a creditor's right mode in social practice, but the usufruct mode is more suitable for timesharing in real right mode. Finally, combined with foreign legislation, the author puts forward some suggestions on the legislation of timeshare in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2;D923.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 汪傳才;論英國的分時(shí)度假立法[J];河北法學(xué);2005年07期

2 薛源;;歐盟對(duì)分時(shí)度假及相關(guān)產(chǎn)品的法律規(guī)制[J];河北法學(xué);2008年09期

3 向東;;分時(shí)度假交易安排下買受人權(quán)利之法律性質(zhì)研究[J];私法研究;2012年01期

本文編號(hào)：2003638