【作者】 张杰；

【导师】 张驰；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法学院 ， 法律， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 动产抵押制度是民法理论中一项古老的制度,但随着物权公示、物权法定原则的确立,动产确定了以占有作为公示方式,在动产上设立的担保物权也仅限于质权,不能设立抵押权。随着商品经济的迅速发展,将抵押局限于不动产已不能适应时代的需要,必须打破抵押权与质权的传统界定,于是动产抵押又进入了各国的视线。各国对动产抵押制度采取了不同的态度。大陆法系国家中,法国和德国不承认动产抵押制度。而日本、魁北克和我国台湾都建立了动产抵押制度。英美法系国家大多承认动产抵押,美国更是典范。我国也建立了动产抵押制度,《物权法》的规定更扩大了其范围,但我国学者对其取舍也存在争议,存、废或与让与担保并存这三种观点笔者认同保留动产抵押制度,但必须对动产抵押标的物的范围进行限制。对于动产抵押标的物的范围,笔者认为一般动产并不适用于动产抵押制度。而对动产抵押的适用范围的设定,笔者认为不是所有的动产都可以设定抵押,应当对可供抵押的动产的范围作相对严格的限制。在立法上对抵押物的限制可以采用两种方式进行,一种是从正面列举,另一种是采用反面列举,相对而言反面列举的方式比较有优势。在我国,《物权法》同时采用了这两种方法对抵押的范围进行了限制,但对可抵押动产的范围的规定还不够具体,范围限制过于宽松。动产抵押作为一种担保物权必须公示,也就必须选择动产抵押制度的公示方式。通过比较意思成立主义、书面成立主义、登记成立主义、意思成立—登记对抗主义和书面形式—登记对抗主义这五种方式,书面形式—登记对抗主义是最合适的选择。文中也研究了登记的效力问题,对登记对抗第三人的含义,第三人的范围及登记对抗效力在时空上的限制进行了分析探讨。笔者还对动产抵押登记制度的完善和通过权利标识的方法对动产抵押的公示进行补强的问题进行了研究并提出了建议。动产抵押制度也不可避免地会产生在同一担保物上和其它不同的担保物权的冲突。在这种情况下也必须充分兼顾各方的利益进行协调,建立一套大多数人觉得公平的规则。可能产生的冲突主要包括动产抵押权和留置权、质权,以及多个动产抵押权之间的冲突。本文根据不同类型的冲突产生的原因,结合我国《物权法》对可能产生的情况以及冲突产生后的顺位确定问题进行了分析研究,针对不同的情况阐述确定顺位的理由,并对不同类型的冲突提出了如何确定顺位的意见。更多还原

【Abstract】 The chattel mortgage system is an age-old system in civil law. With the establishment of the principles of property publication and statutory real right, possession has become the way of chattel publication and, chattel security is limited to pledge rather than mortgage. However, the traditional line between pledge and mortgage has to be redefined since sheer immovable mortgage could no longer keep up with the booming commodity economy; therefore the issue of chattel mortgage aroused worldwide concern once again. Opinions are divided towards the chattel mortgage system--French and Germany, among other countries of the civil law system, do not acknowledge the chattel mortgage system while most countries of the common law system do, typically the United States, with Japan, Quebec and Taiwan following suit. The chattel mortgage system has been established in China and its application, despite all the domestic controversies, has been extended through the legislation of the Property Law. The writer of this paper holds that chattel mortgage system should be maintained in China, yet the scope of the objects of mortgage must be restrained.As to the objects of mortgage, the writer regards ordinary movables as not applicable for chattel mortgage; as to the application of the system, the writer thinks that mortgage cannot be set on all movables and there should be a rigid restriction on its application. Such restrictions can be defined in two ways, namely giving descriptions and providing exceptions-- the latter works better. China, in the Law of Reality, has applied both means. However, the scope of its application could have been defined more specifically and more rigorously.As a real right for security, chattel mortgage must establish its own way of publication. Among the five ways to define its publication, (i.e.:meaning existentialism,writing existentialism ,register existentialism ,meaning existential and register confrontation ,writing existentialism and register confrontation ), writing existentialism and register confrontation serves the ends best. The present paper studies the effectiveness of registration, and discusses the definition, the scope of "the third person" in registration as well as the space-time limitations on registration. Moreover, issues on the perfection of chattel mortgage system, the identification of rights and its significance to chattel mortgage publication are also discussed in this paper and related suggestions are made.It is inevitable that given the real right of movables and of others, certain conflicts may exist as to the security interest on one single object. Under such cases, interests of all the parties should be considered and coordinated in order to set fair rules that are widely acceptable. Possible conflicts include that among chattel mortgage, lien and pledge, as well as among different chattel mortgage rights. The writer discusses these varied conflicts according to the Property Law, predicts their possible outcomes and presented his opinion on how to determine the priority of different rights.更多还原