论无权处分

【作者】 谢颂琳；

【导师】 张秀全；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 民商法学， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 在现代市场经济条件下，动态交易安全亦成为经济发展的关键。由此，如何设计和选择法律制度以解决复杂的纠纷、公正有效地保护交易安全，显然是正在建立和完善社会主义市场经济法律体系的中国法学界所必须思考的问题。无权处分，就典型地体现出社会生活的复杂性和交易安全的保障问题。就其所涉及的主体而言，包括真实权利人、无权处分人、第三人；就其涉及的法律制度而言，包括法律行为制度、债权制度、物权制度。其中，所产生的利益纠纷则主要集中于真实权利人和第三人，而第三人的利益通常代表着交易安全。那么，如何确定无权处分的效力从而公正的保护权利人和第三人的利益，成为法律关注的重心。为此，大陆法系主要国家均设计了其相应的法律制度，中国合同法也针对无权处分做出了规定，也即《合同法》第51条。然而，这些不同的法律制度究竟能否切实实现保障交易安全的目的?笔者认为，应该在选择一定物权变动模式的前提基础上根据现代民法的精神确定无权处分的效力。围绕着物权与债权的区别、物权行为和债权行为的关系以及不同的物权变动模式对无权处分效力的认定来分析《合同法》第41条能否充分保护第三人的合法权益以及选择何种物权变动模式才能更有效地保护相对人的利益，达到维护交易安全的目的。本文主要从以下几个方面来进行论述： 首先，通过对负担行为(Verflichtungsgeschaft)、处分行为(Verfugungsgeschaft)性质的认定、无权处分和相关制度的比较分析，加深了对无权处分概念的理解。无权处分行为，是指无处分权人以自己的名义就他人的权的所为的处分行为利的所为的处分行为标的所为的处分行为。其次，文章对无权处分的立法例之利弊进行了比较分析。无权处分的立法模式从大的方面可分为两种：非以物权行为理论为基础的立法模式，其中包括：债权意思主义和公示对抗主义、公示要件主义、交付主义；以物权行为理论为基础的立法模式。从而得出：以德国民法典和我国台湾地区民法为代表的物权意思主义，以物权行为理论为基础，构建了无权处分的科学的交易安全保护机制。再次，通过对我国有关无权处分效力的主要学说的评析，说明《合同法》第51条系采效力待定说而非无效说。最后，围绕着对《合同法》第51条的理解，进一步探讨了无权处分制度的正确适用以及立法模式的选择问题。 总之，笔者认为对《合同法》第51条可以做如下理解，无处分权人处分他人财产，如果未经权利人追认或者无处分权人订立合同后没有取得处分权，该行为无效，但权利人拒绝追认不得于1!1涂善意取得伟性的适用，不得刘抗善意第三人。即在无权处分的情况下，如果经权利，月宜认或者无处分权人于订立合同后取得处分权的，该合同也是有效的。如果符合善意取得伟峻的适用条件绷月对人在订约时处于善意，且支付了合理的对价，则即使权利人拒约直认，该因无权处分而训’仅的合同也是有效的。虽然合同法对无权处分的这一规定相较于我国传统民法有突破性的进展，不仅{脚刀，了权利人的利益，并且在充分尊重权利人意志的前提下加强了对善意第三人权利的保护。但山J气善意取得韦蝮本身存在着缺陷，因其不逗泪1于不动产、善意这一主观心理状态难以判断等原因，使交易安全得不到充分的保护。而以物权行为理论为基础的物权变动模式所确定的分离原则、抽象原则、公示原则、确定原财洽洽能弥补善意取得布峻的不足。所以在无权处分的问题中，以津蜕又行为理论为基础的市峻构造，远较债权意思主义、公示又柑注义、公示到牛主义和交付一毛义更能实现公正保护交易安全的目的，更育当适应复杂的社会现实情况。侧重于对善意的相对人的保护将使其形成一牙中对交易的合泥次L、对受让的标的物不可追夺胜的信赖与期待，浏各对‘’羊笋人从事交易形成种激励机制，使其对交易产生安全感，并能…划旦地从事交易。保护善意的相对人将有利于建立一牙中真正的信用经济，夕1找吏权利的让渡脚哆}厕口地、有柳字的进行。总而.二丁之，对无权处分行为的效力的确定，必须符合市场经济的客观要求。更多还原

【Abstract】 Under modern market economic condition, development trade safety also becomes the key of economic development. By this, how to design and select legal system in order to solve complex dispute , is just to protect trade safety efficiently, obviously is establishing and perfecting the Chinese law circle of the legal system of socialist market economy the problem that place must think deeply. Have no right to punish , embody the complexity of social life typically with the guarantee of trade safety problem. For the main part that it is concerned with , include true right person , have no right to punish person and the person of 3th; For its legal system that is concerned with , include legal behavior system, the system of creditor’s rights and thing right system. In which the benefit dispute produced major concentration in true right popular support the person of 3th, and the benefit of the person of 3th usually represents trade safety. So, how to is just to protect the person benefit of 3th become the facus of legal solicitude. Therefore, continent law is that major country has designed its corresponding legal system , Chinese contract law also aim at to have no right punishment have made stipulation. However these different legal system actually whether practical realization guarantee the purpose of trade safety? The author thinks that will study to have no right to punish the problem of behavior , must have no right on the prerequisite foundation of selecting surely thing right change pattern according to the spiritual deep analysis of modern civil law to punish the essential and inner feature of behavior , so determines that handle to have no right to punish the legal rule of behavior.This paper major from some following aspects come exposition:The first The burden behavior claimed ( Verflichtungsgeschaft) denote the behavior that sets duty on right, in which meaning express being only the meaning that sets the debt of creditor’s rights , its nature is the behavior of creditor’s rights. The punishment behavior claimed ( Verfugungsgeschaft ) denote m order to occur the behavior with right change of purpose. The second, have no right feature and the concept of punishment: Have no right to punish behavior , denote the punishment behavior been that person marks without punishment right with own name for the right of other person.. The third, the comparisonwith related concept.Second part have no right the legislative regular analysis a meaning doctrine pattern of creditor’s rights of punishment under have no right punishment: Denote to depend on involved party only meaning show , need not go on public show , occur thing right change. Public show confrontation doctrine pattern under have no right punishment: Denote to depend on involved party only meaning show , occur thing right change, public show only oppose effectiveness, instead of thing right change come into effect, the pattern analysis with thing right behavior theory as foundation: With the German ceremony of civil law and the Taiwanese area civil law of our country for the thing right meaning doctrine of representative, with thing right behavior theory for foundation have founded to have no right the trade safety of punishment protect mechanism.The part of 3th for our country concerning have no right to punish effectiveness the comment of major theory Xi one and our country concerning have no right to punish major theory of effectiveness:In a word, I think that can do following understanding for the Sub_clause 51 of " contract law " , punish the property of other person without punishment right person, if do not go through right person posthumously confer or do not have punishment right person conclude contract after do not get punishment right, this behavior is invalid , but right person refuse to posthumously confer must not remove goodwill get system suitable, must not oppose the goodwill person of 3th. In have no right the condition of punishment take off, if go through right person posthumously confer or do not have punishment right更多还原