【摘要】：業(yè)主團(tuán)體在我國(guó)是在房改后出現(xiàn)的一個(gè)新名詞和組織體。我國(guó)《物權(quán)法》把它界定為業(yè)主大會(huì)和業(yè)主委員會(huì)，前者是意思機(jī)關(guān)，后者是前者的執(zhí)行機(jī)關(guān)。作為小區(qū)業(yè)主自己成立的一個(gè)意思自治組織，它的法人性質(zhì)和法律地位一直以來(lái)頗有爭(zhēng)議，但人們對(duì)它的看法必將隨著房產(chǎn)制度的完善而日趨成熟。 1978年以后我國(guó)城鎮(zhèn)住房制度歷經(jīng)了與市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)相適應(yīng)的一系列改革，改變了計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)下住房由政府出錢、政府建設(shè)、政府管理的一套過(guò)時(shí)的房產(chǎn)制度，對(duì)城鎮(zhèn)住房制度、城鎮(zhèn)土地使用權(quán)制度、城鎮(zhèn)房地產(chǎn)建設(shè)制度等進(jìn)行了徹底的變革。這一順應(yīng)時(shí)代潮流的房改，適應(yīng)了市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展要求，使中國(guó)住房制度發(fā)生了翻天覆地的嬗變。一座座商品化的高樓，如雨后春筍般在中國(guó)大地上涌現(xiàn)出來(lái)；一個(gè)個(gè)住宅小區(qū)，星羅棋布。于是，在政府把更多自治權(quán)下放給業(yè)主的背景下，一些以前不存在的問(wèn)題也隨之凸顯出來(lái)。例如物業(yè)管理，具體地說(shuō)是建筑物區(qū)分所有權(quán)以外的共有部分的管理問(wèn)題，誰(shuí)是民事權(quán)利主體？特別是當(dāng)小區(qū)公益部分涉訟的時(shí)候，誰(shuí)來(lái)作原告與被告？盡管我國(guó)《物權(quán)法》第75條和《物業(yè)管理?xiàng)l例》第15條，均授權(quán)小區(qū)業(yè)主可以成立業(yè)主大會(huì)和選舉業(yè)主委員會(huì)作為執(zhí)行機(jī)構(gòu)來(lái)管理小區(qū)，但對(duì)它們的法人性質(zhì)和法律地位均未作明確規(guī)定。這給現(xiàn)實(shí)問(wèn)題的解決帶來(lái)了許多困難。這不能不說(shuō)是我國(guó)立法的一個(gè)缺漏。筆者認(rèn)為業(yè)主團(tuán)體應(yīng)該具有法人資格和地位，我們可以借鑒公司的治理結(jié)構(gòu)來(lái)規(guī)范業(yè)主團(tuán)體的管理。但業(yè)主團(tuán)體又不同于公司，有自己的特點(diǎn)。我們必須超越傳統(tǒng)民法對(duì)法人的分類來(lái)給業(yè)主團(tuán)體定性。傳統(tǒng)觀念按照法人設(shè)立的目的是營(yíng)利性的還是公益性的，把法人分為營(yíng)利性法人和公益性法人兩大類。但現(xiàn)實(shí)中存在一些組織形態(tài)既不以營(yíng)利為目的，也不以公益為目的，而是以互助和互益為目的。像業(yè)主團(tuán)體、商會(huì)、學(xué)會(huì)等諸多以會(huì)員制形式設(shè)立的組織，我們?nèi)绾谓o它定性和歸類？美國(guó)立法上承認(rèn)這類以互益為目的的法人為互益性法人。 業(yè)主團(tuán)體的法人性質(zhì)既然為互益性法人，那么它的治理結(jié)構(gòu)完全可以借鑒公司法人的治理結(jié)構(gòu)。由所有業(yè)主組成的業(yè)主大會(huì)是業(yè)主團(tuán)體的權(quán)力機(jī)構(gòu)，而由業(yè)主大會(huì)選舉產(chǎn)生的業(yè)主委員會(huì)是業(yè)主團(tuán)體的執(zhí)行機(jī)構(gòu)。另外還應(yīng)該仿效公司設(shè)置一個(gè)監(jiān)督機(jī)構(gòu)，履行監(jiān)督職責(zé)，甚至可以聘請(qǐng)一些專職經(jīng)理人來(lái)提高管理效率。但對(duì)于中國(guó)目前住宅小區(qū)的入住率普遍低下的現(xiàn)實(shí)狀況，建議由已入住的業(yè)主組成臨時(shí)業(yè)主委員會(huì)，代行業(yè)主大會(huì)和業(yè)主委員會(huì)的職能。待住宅小區(qū)的入住率達(dá)到一定的比例時(shí)，再成立業(yè)主大會(huì)和選舉業(yè)主委員會(huì)來(lái)管理業(yè)主團(tuán)體的日常事務(wù)。只有承認(rèn)業(yè)主大會(huì)的法人地位，賦予業(yè)主委員會(huì)訴訟主體資格，才能使它們?cè)诼男新氊?zé)的過(guò)程中發(fā)揮應(yīng)有的作用。 本文運(yùn)用比較研究的方法，深入分析了國(guó)內(nèi)外一些國(guó)家和地區(qū)關(guān)于業(yè)主團(tuán)體的研究成果，獨(dú)創(chuàng)性地提出了業(yè)主團(tuán)體為互益性法人的理論見解。呼吁我國(guó)通過(guò)立法確立業(yè)主團(tuán)體的法人地位，使之更好地履行職能。盡管人們對(duì)業(yè)主團(tuán)體的法人地位問(wèn)題莫衷一是，業(yè)主團(tuán)體法人化的觀點(diǎn)可能一時(shí)還難以為大眾所接受；再者由于筆者收集的資料有限和受個(gè)人水平的制約，對(duì)業(yè)主團(tuán)體法人化的探究還不夠深入和完善。但無(wú)論如何，希望通過(guò)對(duì)業(yè)主團(tuán)體法人化的討論，能夠?qū)I(yè)主團(tuán)體的發(fā)展和完善有所幫助。我相信，隨著我國(guó)商品房制度的進(jìn)一步完善，理論界對(duì)業(yè)主團(tuán)體法人性質(zhì)研究的成熟，以及司法實(shí)踐和物業(yè)管理的現(xiàn)實(shí)需要，業(yè)主團(tuán)體法人地位在立法上的確立必將指日可待。
[Abstract]:Owners'organization is a new term and organization after the housing reform in China. It is defined as the owners' Congress and the owners'Committee in the Property Law of China. The former is the meaning organ and the latter is the executive organ of the former. Controversy, but people's views on it will mature with the perfection of the real estate system.
After 1978, China's urban housing system has undergone a series of reforms adapted to the market economy. It has changed a set of outdated housing systems under the planned economy, such as government-funded housing, government-constructed housing and government-managed housing. It has thoroughly changed the urban housing system, the urban land use right system and the urban real estate construction system. As the housing reform conforms to the trend of the times and meets the requirements of the development of the market economy, China's housing system has undergone tremendous changes. For example, property management, specifically, the management of the common part of the apartment ownership, who is the subject of civil rights? Especially when the public interest part of the community involved in litigation, who is the plaintiff and the defendant? Although China's Property Law 75 and Property Management Ordinance 15? The owners of residential areas are authorized to set up owners'congresses and elect owners' committees as executive organs to manage the residential areas, but their legal personality and legal status are not clearly defined. We can use the corporate governance structure for reference to regulate the management of the owner's organization. But the owner's organization is different from the company and has its own characteristics. Legal persons are divided into two categories: for-profit legal persons and public welfare legal persons. However, in reality, some organizational forms are neither for profit-making purposes nor for public welfare purposes, but for mutual assistance and mutual benefit. It is recognized that such mutual interest oriented legal persons are mutual beneficial juridical persons.
Since the legal nature of the owner's organization is a mutually beneficial legal person, its governance structure can absolutely draw lessons from the corporate governance structure. The owner's Congress composed of all the owners is the authority of the owner's organization, and the owner's Committee elected by the owner's Congress is the executive body of the owner's organization. But for the low occupancy rate of residential areas in China, it is suggested that the temporary owners'committee, the modern industry owners' assembly and the owners'committee should be composed of the occupied owners. When the occupancy rate reaches a certain proportion, the owners'Congress and the election committee of the owners are set up to manage the daily affairs of the owners' organizations.
By using the method of comparative study, this paper makes a thorough analysis of the research results on the owners'organizations in some countries and regions at home and abroad, and puts forward the original theoretical view that the owners' organizations are mutually beneficial legal persons. There are different opinions on the status of the owners. The opinions on the incorporation of the owners'organizations may not be acceptable to the public for a while. Moreover, due to the limited data collected by the author and the restriction of the personal level, the research on the incorporation of the owners' organizations is not deep enough and perfect. However, I hope that through the discussion on the incorporation of the owners'organizations, we can have a thorough understanding of the industry. I believe that with the further improvement of China's commercial housing system, the maturity of theoretical research on the legal personality of owners'groups, and the practical needs of judicial practice and property management, the establishment of the legal status of owners' groups in legislation will be imminent.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：江西財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2;D922.181

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 錢小平;業(yè)主公約法律性質(zhì)之探討[J];北京工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2004年04期

2 何曉慧;;我國(guó)業(yè)主公約問(wèn)題之探討[J];甘肅政法成人教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年01期

3 魯剛寧;;業(yè)主團(tuán)體法律人格研究[J];重慶工貿(mào)職業(yè)技術(shù)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年02期

4 許步國(guó);;對(duì)我國(guó)物業(yè)業(yè)主公約若干法律問(wèn)題探討[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2006年12期

5 鄭欣;;業(yè)主委員會(huì)的困境與出路探析[J];雞西大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2008年02期

6 譚玲;業(yè)主委員會(huì)法律地位之探析[J];南方經(jīng)濟(jì);2005年10期

7 馮慶福;;業(yè)主委員會(huì)法律地位分析及重構(gòu)[J];樂(lè)山師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年10期

8 高雅冰;;業(yè)主團(tuán)體法律地位之中外對(duì)比[J];河南理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年03期

9 李建軍;;淺析業(yè)主委員會(huì)的法律性質(zhì)[J];陜西廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2010年02期

10 吳蕓蕓;;業(yè)主委員會(huì)自治困境探討[J];科技資訊;2013年33期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前2條

1 陳仕菊;王濟(jì)維;;淺議小區(qū)業(yè)主成員權(quán)[A];當(dāng)代法學(xué)論壇（二○一○年第3輯）[C];2010年

2 周紅;;物業(yè)管理存在的問(wèn)題及立法思考[A];中國(guó)民商法實(shí)務(wù)論壇論文集[C];2002年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 喬新生;業(yè)主委員會(huì)真能代表業(yè)主嗎[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2005年

2 維日律師事務(wù)所律師 羅慶鋒;談?wù)剺I(yè)主委員會(huì)備案的法律效力[N];法治快報(bào);2009年

3 孔琳;業(yè)主找“管家”難[N];中國(guó)房地產(chǎn)報(bào);2003年

4 韶關(guān)日?qǐng)?bào)記者 彭饋〖凹?xì)J，

本文編號(hào)：2184780