论房地一致原则

【作者】 曾锐彬；

【导师】 庄敬华；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 民商法学， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 长期以来,对于土地及地表建筑物在法律上的关系我国一直采用严格房地一致原则,即“房随地走”、“地随房走”的模式。但随着市场经济的发展,一方面《物权法》再次确认房地一致原则,另一方面由于经济生活的复杂性在实践中出现了一些房地分离的现象。本文将运用比较法学、历史法学的研究方法,从世界各主要大陆法国家对房屋与土地采用的一元主义与我国目前所采用的房地一致原则的比较法入手,对房地一致原则在我国的经济基础及发展方向等问题加以分析,对实务中出现的某种分离现象提出立法上的建议。本文除了引言和结论外,主要分为五部分:第一部分主要阐述房地一致原则概念发展及其确立的过程,剖析各主要大陆法国家的房地一致原则与罗马法绝对所有权制度的关系,并从比较法的角度揭示房地一致原则在我国的产生及发展过程,就该制度设立的目的从经济学,政治学,法学角度作简要探讨。第二部分主要分析房地一致原则的几种观点,分别是主从物说,捆绑说及整体说,并对整体说在保护交易第三人权益,维护交易秩序方面的功能进行分析,从而说明整体说理论最适合我国现有国情。第三部分主要论述房地一致原则作为效力性规范对民事主体的意思自治的约束性。该部分着重阐述当事人意思自治不得违背房地一致原则的强制性规范,两者冲突时应当将意思自治置于房地一致的强制性规范效力之下,才能真正树立法律本身的权威。第四部分主要从现代经济发展来看我国房地一致原则的例外。我国法律确立房地一致原则,但房地一致的例外却早已存在于实务之中。此部分主要从划拨土地所有权上建筑物抵押的实现及建筑物区分所有权中地下车库的归属进行讨论,并对实践中出现的房地分离现象分别提出切实可行的整改措施。第五部分主要分析学者们对房地一致原则不同的观点,结合房地一致原则在我国的运用现状,分析传统房地一致原则的不足,并提出相关立法上的建议。笔者认为要不断完善房地一致原则,就应当从立法目的入手,将传统房地一致原则侧重保护国有土地所有权上升为保护国有土地所有权与土地现有利用权人权利并重,充分引入意思自治,并且强调房地一致原则应在一定限度内容忍房地分离现象的存在。更多还原

【Abstract】 As for the disposition of rights on estate, there is an overriding principle having been followed that conforming subject of rights on building and that of land, which is also known as "land transferred accompanies the building transferred, "and "building transferred accompanies the land"model.As the development of market economy, on the one hand, laws like "Property Law"affirmed this principle;on the other hand, due to the complexity of situation in practice there have already been some exceptions of the principle.Thus this dissertation begins with the comparison of the principle in China with that of other main civil law countries, discussing the social background in China, with which as the basis, to analyze the true meaning of the principle.What is more, economic foundation was also analyzed, and fin ally offered some legislative proposals to better principle.The dissertation contains five parts excluding the preface and the conclusion:The first part is to explain the concept of the principle and illustrate development, analyzing the relationship between this principle and the absolute ownership of Roman law in major civil law countries. And the author proceeds comparative research on the principle of conforming subject of rights of building and that of land.Furthermore, the author discusses the propose of this principle in the aspects of economics, political science, and legal respectively.The second part refers to several sub-views about the principle, which are known as ’building adhere to land’, ’building bundled with land’ and ’building and land as an integration’. The last one is proven to be the most suitable for China’s current national conditions and the most effective way to protect the rights and interests of the third-party in transaction, thus itmaintain good order while trade.The third part refers to the principle of conforming subject of right on building and that of land, as a compulsory norms, is binding for civil subjects who emphasized on individual autonomy.Which means it should be superior to the individual autonomy if there stands conflicts between the two.All could help to establish the authoritative image of law itself.The fourth part refers to the exceptions of the principle of conforming subject of right on building and that of land. Laws (like ’property law’) confirmed the principle, but the exceptions have already existed in practice. And the author illustrates the exception which occurs during the realization of mortgage about buildings on allocated land, and the ownership of underground garage.The fifth Part presents the different point of views of scholars on this principle, associated with the situations which the principle applies to, also points out the disadvantage of it. Thus, the author here tried to offer some legislative proposals to improve the principle. Since the traditional principle focused on the protecting ownership of land, and now it maybe converted into protecting the use right as well, to fully introduce individual autonomy, and the most important is, facing the possibility of exceptions existing.更多还原