本文選題：信托 + 信托財(cái)產(chǎn)��； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：現(xiàn)代信托制度起源于英國(guó)，是指委托人出于對(duì)受托人的信任，將信托財(cái)產(chǎn)轉(zhuǎn)移給受托人，由其為受益人利益或特定目的持有、管理運(yùn)用、處分該財(cái)產(chǎn)的一種財(cái)產(chǎn)管理制度。作為英國(guó)人在法學(xué)領(lǐng)域取得的最偉大最杰出的成就，在數(shù)百年的發(fā)展過(guò)程中，逐漸形成了一套自身獨(dú)具特色的理念和制度架構(gòu)。然而，基于大陸法系與英美法系的法律文化差異，信托制度作為移植英美法系的舶來(lái)品，與我國(guó)具體實(shí)際情況的融合問(wèn)題并未得到很好地解決，一直處于“水上浮油”的狀態(tài)。其中，處于信托制度核心地位的信托財(cái)產(chǎn)在具體實(shí)踐運(yùn)用中也產(chǎn)生了一系列的困難。 雖然，我國(guó)《信托法》對(duì)信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的獨(dú)立性以及信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的破產(chǎn)隔離功能做了相關(guān)規(guī)定，但是生硬的將我國(guó)民法單一所有權(quán)制度覆蓋于信托法律關(guān)系之上，必然會(huì)產(chǎn)生一系列實(shí)踐性矛盾。我國(guó)信托法對(duì)信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的所有權(quán)歸屬用“委托給”這樣的字眼簡(jiǎn)單帶過(guò)，就使信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的所有權(quán)處于模糊的境地，也使得在我國(guó)現(xiàn)行法律制度下，信托財(cái)產(chǎn)破產(chǎn)隔離功能的實(shí)現(xiàn)存在一系列障礙和困境，如信托財(cái)產(chǎn)所有權(quán)歸屬不明確，信托財(cái)產(chǎn)獨(dú)立性保障機(jī)制欠缺等。在我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐之中，這些問(wèn)題都亟待解決。本文試從明確信托財(cái)產(chǎn)所有權(quán)、建立和完善信托財(cái)產(chǎn)登記公示制度、健全信托財(cái)產(chǎn)破產(chǎn)隔離功能惡意適用的法律救濟(jì)及相關(guān)法律制度的完善方面解決信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的破產(chǎn)隔離功能實(shí)現(xiàn)上的障礙問(wèn)題，從而促使信托制度能夠更好地發(fā)揮其優(yōu)越的功能。 本文除引言和結(jié)語(yǔ)外，，分為四個(gè)部分： 第一部分為信托財(cái)產(chǎn)破產(chǎn)隔離功能概述。首先是對(duì)信托財(cái)產(chǎn)進(jìn)行了概述，主要是界定了信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的含義、特性和范圍；其次對(duì)信托財(cái)產(chǎn)破產(chǎn)隔離功能的基礎(chǔ)理論進(jìn)行了論述，主要是信托財(cái)產(chǎn)破產(chǎn)隔離功能的含義、特性，以及信托財(cái)產(chǎn)破產(chǎn)隔離功能產(chǎn)生的淵源和實(shí)現(xiàn)前提。 第二部分為信托財(cái)產(chǎn)破產(chǎn)隔離功能的法律效果。首先對(duì)信托財(cái)產(chǎn)破產(chǎn)隔離與信托當(dāng)事人即委托人、受托人和受益人的破產(chǎn)隔離效果進(jìn)行了敘述；其次闡述了各信托當(dāng)事人之債權(quán)人利益平衡問(wèn)題。 第三部分為我國(guó)信托財(cái)產(chǎn)制度的缺陷。首先是闡述了信托財(cái)產(chǎn)破產(chǎn)隔離功能在實(shí)踐中難以實(shí)現(xiàn)的最主要的原因——信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的所有權(quán)歸屬不明問(wèn)題；其次對(duì)信托財(cái)產(chǎn)登記制度的缺失包括過(guò)于嚴(yán)厲的登記生效主義、相關(guān)配套措施及持續(xù)公示制度的缺失等進(jìn)行了敘述；再次對(duì)于實(shí)踐中存在的惡意適用破產(chǎn)隔離功能問(wèn)題進(jìn)行了論述。 第四部分為信托財(cái)產(chǎn)破產(chǎn)隔離功能相關(guān)制度的完善。首先應(yīng)該明確信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的所有權(quán)歸屬于受托人，其次關(guān)于信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的登記制度應(yīng)當(dāng)采用登記對(duì)抗主義，再次對(duì)于惡意適用破產(chǎn)隔離功能的問(wèn)題應(yīng)該結(jié)合其他相關(guān)法律規(guī)定進(jìn)行綜合規(guī)制。
[Abstract]:The modern trust system originated in England is a kind of property management system in which the trustor transfers the trust property to the trustee for the benefit of the beneficiary or for a specific purpose to hold manage use and dispose of the property out of the trust of the trustee. As the greatest and most outstanding achievement of the British in the field of law, in the course of hundreds of years' development, it has gradually formed a set of its own unique idea and system structure. However, because of the difference of legal culture between the civil law system and the common law system, the trust system, as an import of the transplants of the common law system, has not been solved well with the actual situation of our country and has been in the state of "floating oil on the water". Among them, trust property in the core of the trust system has also produced a series of difficulties in practical application. Although the Trust Law of our country provides the independence of the trust property and the bankruptcy isolation function of the trust property, the sole ownership system of the civil law of our country covers the trust legal relationship. A series of practical contradictions will inevitably arise. The trust law of our country simply takes the word "entrusted to" for the ownership of the trust property, which makes the ownership of the trust property in a vague situation, and also makes the ownership of the trust property in the current legal system of our country. There are a series of obstacles and difficulties in realizing the function of trust property bankruptcy isolation, such as unclear ownership of trust property, lack of independent guarantee mechanism of trust property, etc. In the judicial practice of our country, these problems need to be solved urgently. This paper tries to establish and perfect the system of registering and publicizing trust property from the perspective of defining the ownership of trust property. Improve the trust property bankruptcy isolation function maliciously applicable legal relief and the improvement of relevant legal system to solve the trust property bankruptcy isolation function of obstacles to achieve, so as to promote the trust system can better play its superior function. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this article is divided into four parts: The first part is an overview of trust property bankruptcy isolation function. Firstly, it summarizes the trust property, mainly defines the meaning, characteristics and scope of the trust property, and then discusses the basic theory of the trust property bankruptcy isolation function, mainly the meaning of the trust property bankruptcy isolation function. Characteristics, as well as the origin and realization premise of trust property bankruptcy isolation function. The second part is the legal effect of trust property bankruptcy isolation function. Firstly, it describes the effect of bankruptcy isolation of trust property and trust parties, that is, the trustor, the trustee and the beneficiary, and then expounds the balance of the interests of the creditors of the trust parties. The third part is the defect of the trust property system in our country. First of all, it expounds the main reason why the function of trust property bankruptcy isolation is difficult to realize in practice-the ownership of trust property is not clear; secondly, the lack of registration system of trust property includes too strict registration and effectivism. The related supporting measures and the absence of continuous publicity system are described, and the problem of maliciously applying bankruptcy isolation function in practice is discussed again. The fourth part is the perfection of trust property bankruptcy isolation system. Firstly, it should be clear that the ownership of the trust property belongs to the trustee, and secondly, the registration system of the trust property should adopt the registration antagonism. Thirdly, the problem of maliciously applying bankruptcy isolation function should be combined with other relevant laws and regulations.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D922.282

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 賈艷;廖華;;論信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的獨(dú)立性——兼論我國(guó)相關(guān)法律制度的完善[J];當(dāng)代教育理論與實(shí)踐;2011年04期

2 杜鵬;;信托財(cái)產(chǎn)獨(dú)立性制度的價(jià)值分析[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年22期

3 文杰;論我國(guó)《信托法》的基本原則[J];廣西政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年01期

4 鄭宏;;信托登記制度比較研究[J];河北法學(xué);2007年12期

5 趙許明,羅大鈞;信托財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)屬本質(zhì)探究[J];華僑大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年03期

6 王恒;由信托財(cái)產(chǎn)的獨(dú)立性看信托公示登記制度[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)經(jīng)緯;2004年02期

7 周揚(yáng)培,劉玲;略論破產(chǎn)隔離機(jī)制[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)論壇;2003年04期

8 任戰(zhàn)江;;國(guó)際化趨勢(shì)下的商法制度——以信托制度為中心[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)研究導(dǎo)刊;2007年09期

9 符琪;;論信托財(cái)產(chǎn)獨(dú)立性[J];金融理論與實(shí)踐;2011年12期

10 奚慶;方紅;;信托的源起與商業(yè)化[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年01期

本文編號(hào)：1834771