【作者】 文敦勇；

【导师】 曹海晶；

【作者基本信息】 华中师范大学 ， 经济法学， 2001， 硕士

【摘要】 为债权的担保而奋斗是市场经济的必然现象保证、质押或者抵押都会提高交易成本。严格的担保要求，已使分期付款买卖无法进一步得到快速发展。而所有权保留制度，会使以分期付款（或分期履行义务）为特征的买卖制度及类似制度得到完善，并将推动我国分期付款型商品交易的进一步发展。 所有权保留制度，是指在买卖（或者互易等类似交易行为）中，买受人虽先占有、使用标的物，但在双方当事人约定的特定条件（通常是价金的一部或者全部清偿）成就之前，出卖人仍保留标的物所有权；待该条件成就后，再将标的物所有权移转给买受人的制度。 由于所有权保留制度较强的灵活性和广泛的适用性，英、法、德、美等国和我国台湾地区都普遍采用该制度。 我国大陆有关所有权保留的规定体现于新颁布的《合同法》中。该法第134条规定：“当事人可以在买卖合同中约定买受人未履行支付价款或其他义务的，标的物所有权属于出卖人。” 在所有权保留买卖中，买受人买受人的主要权利是期待权。所谓期待权，是指买受人在尚未满足特定条件时，虽不能取得标的物所有权，但却因其与出卖人的约定，取得了这样一种特殊的法律地位：如果买受人满足了特定条件（如支付完毕价款）时，应当取得标的物所有权。关于期待权的性质，法学界有不同的观点。本文认为，买受人的期待权为物权化的债权或者效力扩张的债权。买受人的期待权就其本质属性而言，属于债权；但因受所有权保留制度特性的影响，作为债权的期待权的效力已有所扩张，包容了原本归属于物权效力的部分效力。 所有权保留买卖中，条件尚未成就时，出卖人仍享有对其标的物的所有权，买受人则享有所有权的期待权。若出卖人此时不是把其在所有权保留买卖中的地位让与给第三人，而是向第三人让与标的物的完整所有权时，势必会妨害期待权人（买受人）的利益。如何在这一情形下，进行合理的利益分配，本 IS9霎弓。】币上令八订才 is胃窑／J w｛1寸”．二7匕人 ＼、——yVu二nS 丁旺引S 文对此也进行了探讨。文章认为，除应适用善意取得制度外，应当赋予买受人 对该行为的撤销权。同样，在第三人侵害买受人的倩形下，同样应赋予买受人 的损害赔偿请求权。 所有权保留制度中出卖人的主要权利是取回权，即在买受人不履行约定 义务等倩形下将标的物取回的权利。 取回权的行使对已存所有权保留买卖合同效力的影响是怎样的？一直未 形成统一见解。法学界有解除权效力说、附法定期限解除契约说和实现契约说 三种，本文同意第三种观点。因为，解除权是一种受到严格限制的权利，法律 一方面承认它，另一方面又限制它，使其不至于随意破坏当事人的交易努力， 破坏现存法律关系。而取回权的行使则不消灭当事人间的合同关系。 实践中，标的物常基于各种情况而添附致使丧失其同一性。这种情况下 如何确定取回权效力所及标的物的范围，就成为对买卖各方利益影响重大的问 题。文章认为，应当有条件地承认取回权的效力范围及于添附后的标的物。对 于买受人未经出卖人授权而自行处分标的物的情形，出卖人取回标的物的范围 不仅包括标的物本身，还可借鉴美国法律的规定，权利及于因处分标的物而产 生的收益之上。更多还原

【Abstract】 Guaranty for debt right is necessary development of market economy; mortgage definitely will increase the exchange cost. The strict requirement of guaranty has made the further development of installment payment impossible. The reserving system of ownership will perfect the trading institutions characterized with installment payment, and enable the further development of the trade by installments payment. Under the ownership-reserved system, the buyer in the trade (or in the barter or exchange activities) own and use the objectives at first, but before the specified clauses in the contract reached by the both parties are fulfilled, the seller still claim the ownership. And the ownership is transferred to the buyer upon the performance of the due duties. The ownership detaining system, due to its feasibility and adaptability, is widely used in US, British, Germany and Taiwan. The regulations which can be viewed as part of this system are found in the lately enacted ontract Law? where the item 134 says that he parties have the right to reserve the ownership of the objectives in the seller in the contract when the buyer does not pay for it or does not perform other duties? In the ownership reserved trade, the buyer enjoys the right of expectation, which means that the buyer obtain the legal right of ownership, although he can not get the ownership of the objective because some requirements are not satisfied in accordance with his contract with the seller, after he tries to finish his responsibilities, for instance, pay off the prices. Various views about the right of expectation can be found in the legal field. In this article, the author thinks the buyer’s right of expectation is the materialized or more effective debt right. That is to say that the right of expectation is virtually the debt right. But under the ownership reserved system, the right of expectation has expanded in terms of debt right, including some effects of the material right effects. In this kind of exchange, the seller still have the ownership of the objective if the clauses have not been completely met and the buyer only can claim the right of expectation. If the seller transfers the whole ownership to the third party instead of his part of right, it will infringe on the interests of the buyer. So this article studies how to distribute the interests reasonably under this circumstance. The author concludes that the buyer should be granted the right of revocation except the system of goodwill acquisition, similarly, when the third party infringes on the buyer’s right, the buyer has the right to claim for compensation. In the ownership-reserved system, the seller has the right to take back the objective if the buyer does not perform his responsibilities. It has not been agreed on how the right of taking-back affects the validity of the ownership reserved trade contract. Generally there are 3 different schools of thoughts: revocation right effect theorem, legal deadline attached contract revocation theorem and contract accomplishment theorem. The author agrees with the third one. Revocation right is strictly restricted, on one hand it is admitted by the laws and on the other hand it is restricted by them so that it will not hinder the endeavor for an exchange of the parties and the current lawful relations arbitrarily, and the right of taking-back will not devastate the contractual relationship among the parties. In更多还原