本文選題：買賣擔(dān)保借貸 + 房屋買賣合同��； 參考：《煙臺大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：買賣擔(dān)保借貸作為我國實務(wù)中逐步發(fā)展起來的一種非典型民間擔(dān)保形式,因其程序簡單,適用范圍靈活等特性頗受當事人的青睞。雖然我國學(xué)者對于該擔(dān)保提出讓與擔(dān)保,后讓與擔(dān)保等多種解釋理論,但對于其性質(zhì)如何認定以及是否具有獨立價值和存在空間仍未形成統(tǒng)一觀點。實際,讓與擔(dān)保和后讓與擔(dān)保的本質(zhì)皆為讓與擔(dān)保,追究買賣擔(dān)保借貸當事人之真實意思表示及擔(dān)保實際發(fā)生的效力,其讓與擔(dān)保物權(quán)的效力是得以肯定的。本文以買賣擔(dān)保借貸性質(zhì)和規(guī)范路徑為研究目的,采用比較法學(xué)研究方法,擇取實務(wù)相關(guān)的35個案件審理結(jié)果為分析突破口,對當前爭議理論觀點進行剖析比較。對照德國、日本讓與擔(dān)保理論,從理論與結(jié)構(gòu)上對買賣擔(dān)保借貸合同的物保性質(zhì)進行考證和認定。通過法律解釋探尋買賣擔(dān)保借貸與現(xiàn)行法律相融并存的可行性和有效空間,通過現(xiàn)有公示制度的調(diào)整和延伸,彌補該制度公示缺失的現(xiàn)狀。通過原則把控和規(guī)范構(gòu)建對當事人權(quán)利進行歸納和理順,解決該制度現(xiàn)存爭議以及風(fēng)險控訴,對其進行有效規(guī)范以期在不動產(chǎn)擔(dān)保領(lǐng)域發(fā)揮應(yīng)有之優(yōu)勢。
[Abstract]:As a kind of non-typical folk guarantee form developed gradually in the practice of our country, the secured loan is favored by the parties because of its simple procedure and flexible scope of application. Although Chinese scholars put forward a variety of explanation theories, such as transfer guarantee and post-transfer guarantee, there is still no unified view on how to determine its nature and whether it has independent value and space of existence. In fact, the essence of the guarantee of transfer and post-assignment is the guarantee of assignment, and the validity of the assignment of interest in security can be confirmed by investigating the real expression of intention of the parties to the secured loan and the actual effect of the guarantee. This paper aims at the nature and the standard path of the sale and purchase guarantee loan, adopts the comparative law research method, selects the trial results of 35 cases related to the practice as the breakthrough point, and analyzes and compares the current controversial theoretical viewpoints. In contrast to the theory of transfer guarantee in Germany, this paper theoretically and structurally verifies and confirms the property of rem guarantee in the contract of buying and selling secured loan. Through the legal interpretation to explore the feasibility and effective space of the coexistence of the sale and purchase guarantee loan and the current law, through the adjustment and extension of the existing public announcement system, to make up for the present situation of the lack of the public notice in the system. Through the principle to control and regulate the construction of the rights of the parties to sum up and straighten out, to resolve the existing disputes of the system and risk complaints, to effectively regulate it in order to play its due advantage in the field of real estate security.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：煙臺大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.3

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 董新輝;;后讓與擔(dān)保的重新解讀——以《民間借貸司法解釋》第二十四條為中心[J];學(xué)術(shù)交流;2016年07期

2 莊加園;;“買賣型擔(dān)�！迸c流押條款的效力——《民間借貸規(guī)定》第24條的解讀[J];清華法學(xué);2016年03期

3 濟南市中級人民法院課題組;劉延杰;;買賣式擔(dān)保的實踐類型與裁判規(guī)則研究[J];山東審判;2016年02期

4 張偉;;買賣合同擔(dān)保民間借貸合同的解釋論——以法釋〔2015〕18號第24條為中心[J];法學(xué)評論;2016年02期

5 張海鵬;;擔(dān)保性房屋買賣合同法律性質(zhì)之探析——兼析《民間借貸司法解釋》第24條[J];東方法學(xué);2016年02期

6 薛啟明;;中國法語境下的動產(chǎn)讓與擔(dān)保:體系定位與功能反思[J];法學(xué)論壇;2016年02期

7 高圣平;;擔(dān)保物權(quán)司法解釋起草中的重大爭議問題[J];中國法學(xué);2016年01期

8 常澄;;論不動產(chǎn)讓與擔(dān)保的效力[J];廣州廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報;2015年06期

9 崔建遠;;“擔(dān)保”辨——基于擔(dān)保泛化弊端嚴重的思考[J];政治與法律;2015年12期

10 張力毅;;通過契約實現(xiàn)的物之支配關(guān)系——債權(quán)物權(quán)化的另一種解釋論框架[J];東方法學(xué);2015年06期

，

本文編號：1915503