本文選題：業(yè)主　切入點(diǎn)：建筑物區(qū)分所有權(quán)　出處：《鄭州大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：城鎮(zhèn)化建設(shè)的迅速推進(jìn),催生了大量小區(qū)的產(chǎn)生。數(shù)量規(guī)模的迅速上升,卻出現(xiàn)了小區(qū)許多功能性缺位的問題,如諸多商販在小區(qū)叫賣商品占用公共場所,物業(yè)服務(wù)企業(yè)在共有部位懸掛廣告條幅、張貼宣傳廣告等等。由于法律法規(guī)對業(yè)主知情權(quán)的本質(zhì)屬性、主體、范圍以及權(quán)利行使缺乏可操作性規(guī)定,再加上司法實(shí)踐中對此也存在不同認(rèn)識(shí),所以,業(yè)主如何最大限度地保護(hù)知情權(quán),實(shí)屬重要。本文擬分三章進(jìn)行研究探討:第一章詳細(xì)闡述了業(yè)主知情權(quán)的基本理論。首先,以知情權(quán)作為切入點(diǎn),進(jìn)而對業(yè)主知情權(quán)的權(quán)利屬性進(jìn)行探討。其次,對業(yè)主、業(yè)主大會(huì)和業(yè)主委員會(huì)等業(yè)主知情權(quán)的主體性質(zhì)、成立及運(yùn)行等進(jìn)行理論分析。最后,在分析立法不足,以及理論界不同認(rèn)識(shí)的基礎(chǔ)上,本文從法定和約定兩個(gè)方面,對業(yè)主知情權(quán)的范圍進(jìn)行分析研究。第二章主要分析了業(yè)主知情權(quán)的實(shí)證現(xiàn)狀。從中國裁判文書網(wǎng)和北大法寶隨機(jī)選取17個(gè)案例,進(jìn)行分類篩選,并著重就業(yè)主知情權(quán)的行使現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行分析,提煉出司法運(yùn)行中存在的問題。例如,對于糾紛能否通過業(yè)主知情權(quán)訴訟解決,業(yè)主缺乏綜合思量;相關(guān)資料和信息對應(yīng)的義務(wù)主體沒有進(jìn)一步明確細(xì)化;業(yè)主知情權(quán)的權(quán)利范圍,缺乏統(tǒng)一的界定標(biāo)準(zhǔn);證據(jù)舉證不能和權(quán)利行使的期限是影響業(yè)主維權(quán)的兩大障礙;以及人民法院對業(yè)主查閱權(quán)的具體形式存在不同認(rèn)識(shí)。第三章重點(diǎn)完善了業(yè)主知情權(quán)的規(guī)則制度。針對業(yè)主知情權(quán)實(shí)踐中存在的問題,本文從以下四個(gè)方面提出可行性規(guī)則制度。第一,業(yè)主自身方面。雙管齊下,逐步讓業(yè)主意識(shí)權(quán)利的存在和現(xiàn)實(shí)意義,達(dá)到讓廣大業(yè)主積極參與社區(qū)活動(dòng)的目的。第二,立法制度方面。通過創(chuàng)設(shè)新的業(yè)主自治組織,完善業(yè)主知情權(quán)范圍,引入訴訟時(shí)效制度,以及通過推行舉證責(zé)任倒置和異地管轄等方式,切實(shí)維護(hù)業(yè)主權(quán)利。第三,行政介入方面。借助行政機(jī)關(guān)的指導(dǎo)和監(jiān)督作用,達(dá)到降低業(yè)主委員會(huì)成立門檻,提高決議有效通過率,以及完善資料的公布和查閱方式,保障業(yè)主知情權(quán)的實(shí)現(xiàn)。最后,司法救濟(jì)方面。結(jié)合實(shí)際狀況,本文重點(diǎn)就仲裁和簡易程序進(jìn)行分析完善。
[Abstract]:The rapid development of urbanization has given birth to a large number of residential areas. The rapid increase in the number of scale, but there are a lot of functional deficiencies in the community, such as many vendors in the residential areas to sell goods occupied public places, Property service enterprises hang advertising banners in common sites, post advertisements, etc. Due to the lack of operational regulations on the essential attribute, subject, scope and exercise of the right to know of the owner in laws and regulations, In addition, there are different views on this in judicial practice, so how to protect the right to know to the maximum extent is really important. This paper will be divided into three chapters to study: the first chapter elaborates the basic theory of the owner's right to know. Taking the right to know as the starting point, the author discusses the property of the owner's right to know. Secondly, it makes a theoretical analysis of the subject nature, establishment and operation of the owner's right to know, such as the owner, the owners' Congress and the owner's committee. On the basis of analyzing the insufficiency of legislation and the different understanding of the theorists, this paper discusses the two aspects of legislation and agreement. The second chapter mainly analyzes the empirical situation of the owner's right to know. And emphatically analyzes the current situation of the owner's right to know, abstracts the existing problems in the judicial operation. For example, whether the dispute can be resolved through the owner's right to know lawsuit, the owner lacks comprehensive consideration; Relevant information and information corresponding to the obligations of the subject has not been further clarified; the scope of the owner's right to know, lack of a unified definition standard; evidence proof and the time limit of the exercise of rights are two major obstacles affecting the rights of owners; The third chapter focuses on perfecting the rules and systems of the owners' right to know, aiming at the problems existing in the practice of the owners' right to know. This paper puts forward the feasibility rule system from the following four aspects. First, the owner himself, both ways, gradually makes the owner aware of the existence and practical significance of the rights, so as to achieve the purpose of enabling the majority of owners to actively participate in community activities. Second, Legislative system. Through the creation of a new owner's self-governing organization, the improvement of the scope of the owner's right to know, the introduction of the statute of limitations system, and the implementation of the inversion of the burden of proof and jurisdiction in different places, the owners' rights can be effectively safeguarded. Third, In the aspect of administrative intervention, with the help of the guidance and supervision role of the administrative organ, the threshold for the establishment of the owners' committee is lowered, the effective pass rate of the resolution is increased, and the publication and access of the information is improved to ensure the realization of the owner's right to know. Judicial relief. Combined with the actual situation, this paper focuses on arbitration and summary procedures for analysis and improvement.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：鄭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D922.181;D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 毛啟蒙;;社區(qū)業(yè)主維權(quán)的發(fā)展趨勢[J];城市問題;2014年12期

2 魯剛寧;;論業(yè)主知情權(quán)[J];產(chǎn)業(yè)與科技論壇;2013年11期

3 張戰(zhàn)勇;;城市居民社區(qū)自治組織發(fā)展初探——以業(yè)主委員會(huì)為例[J];前沿;2007年05期

4 孟憲生;;業(yè)委會(huì)不能置于街道辦和居委會(huì)的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下——與河山先生商榷[J];現(xiàn)代物業(yè);2007年07期

5 林一海;;業(yè)主大會(huì)不過是一個(gè)夢想[J];現(xiàn)代物業(yè);2006年04期

6 楊立新;制定民法典人格權(quán)法編需要解決的若干問題 "中國民法典制定研討會(huì)"討論問題輯要及評論(一)[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年06期

7 徐昕;論私力救濟(jì)與公力救濟(jì)的交錯(cuò)——一個(gè)法理的闡釋[J];法制與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2004年04期

8 趙正群;得知權(quán)理念及其在我國的初步實(shí)踐[J];中國法學(xué);2001年03期

9 陳紹方;房管所轉(zhuǎn)換經(jīng)營機(jī)制中的若干法律問題[J];中國房地產(chǎn);1998年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 薛永慧;群體糾紛訴訟機(jī)制研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2006年

2 吳寧;社會(huì)弱勢群體權(quán)利保護(hù)的法理[D];吉林大學(xué);2005年

，

本文編號：1676343