本文選題：房屋登記 + 審查標準　； 參考：《湖南大學》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文選取的房屋登記行政確認案例中，登記機關是否履行了審查責任與善意取得制度能否適用本案是案件原被告雙方爭議的焦點，，也是本論文分析研究的關鍵。一方面我國物權法對于登記機關的審查標準是形式審查還是實質(zhì)審查沒有明確的規(guī)定，造成登記機關為減輕自己工作量和法律責任，基本采取以形式審查為標準。而我國物權登記法律制度現(xiàn)實卻要加強實質(zhì)審查，以體現(xiàn)登記制度與物權法律體系的銜接。因此，確定實質(zhì)的審查標準是完善登記制度的重要手段。另一方面，我國善意取得制度是建立在債權形式主義為主，意思主義為輔物權變動模式基礎之上，是以無權處分為前提條件，所以對轉(zhuǎn)讓合同性質(zhì)的判斷直接決定了能否適用善意取得。但是在理論和實踐中，對無權處分的判斷存在頗多爭議的問題，首先是無權處分性質(zhì)的認定，其次是善意取得中的無權處分與合同法中無權處分合同的銜接問題，最后是無權處分轉(zhuǎn)讓合同效力對善意取得的適用的影響。在認定無權處分性質(zhì)時，要嚴格區(qū)分無權處分行為與無權代理行為，因為無權代理行為也有處分之行為，但是它不屬于善意取得制度中之無權處分，故沒有適用善意取得的可能。對第三人的善意的判斷也是一個復雜的問題，涉及到善意的判斷標準、判斷的時點等問題。本案中，一審法官認定被告履行了合理的審查職責，登記行為合法有效，第三人適用善意取得保有受讓的房屋所有權。但是法官將無權代理行為斷章取義解釋為“無權”和“處分”，進而認為符合善意取得制度，是一個嚴重裁判錯誤。
[Abstract]:In the case of administrative confirmation of housing registration, whether the registration authority has fulfilled the responsibility of examination and whether the system of acquisition in good faith can be applied in this case is the focus of the dispute between the original defendant and the defendant in the case, and is also the key to the analysis and study of this paper. On the one hand, there is no clear stipulation on whether the examination standard of the registration authority is formal or substantive, which causes the registration authority to take the formal examination as the standard in order to reduce its workload and legal responsibility. However, the reality of the legal system of real right registration in our country should strengthen the substantive examination in order to reflect the link between the registration system and the legal system of real right. Therefore, the determination of substantive standards is an important means to improve the registration system. On the other hand, the system of bona fide acquisition in our country is based on the formalism of creditor's rights, and on the basis of the mode of change of property right supplemented by the doctrine of will, which is based on the unauthorized disposition. Therefore, the nature of the transfer contract directly determines the nature of the application of bona fide acquisition. However, in theory and practice, there are many controversial issues in the judgment of unauthorized disposition, first, the determination of the nature of unauthorized disposition, and secondly, the connection between unauthorized disposition in bona fide acquisition and unauthorized disposition contract in contract law. Finally, the effect of the transfer contract of unauthorized disposition on the application of bona fide acquisition. In determining the nature of unauthorized disposition, it is necessary to strictly distinguish between unauthorized disposition and unauthorized agency, because the unauthorized agency also has the disposition, but it does not belong to the unauthorized disposition in the bona fide acquisition system. Therefore, there is no possibility of bona fide acquisition. The judgment of the third person's goodwill is also a complicated problem, involving the standard of good will and the time point of judgment. In this case, the judge of first instance found that the defendant had performed a reasonable duty of examination and that the registration was lawful and effective, and the third party applied bona fide to acquire the ownership of the house that had been transferred. However, the judge interprets the act of unauthorized agency as "unauthorized" and "punishment", and further considers that it is a serious judgment error to conform to the system of bona fide acquisition.
【學位授予單位】：湖南大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D920.5;D923.2;D922.181

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前9條

1 陳亞菁;;限制措施登記之探究[J];中國房地產(chǎn);2011年15期

2 婁愛華;;論善意取得制度中的轉(zhuǎn)讓合同效力問題——兼談《合同法》第51條與《物權法》第106條之關系[J];法律科學(西北政法大學學報);2011年01期

3 王利明;;不動產(chǎn)善意取得的構成要件研究[J];政治與法律;2008年10期

4 石晶;張鋒;;不動產(chǎn)善意取得的構成要件及法律效力分析[J];理論界;2008年03期

5 吳兆祥;;不動產(chǎn)登記審查的基本要求——公信和效率[J];中國司法;2007年07期

6 屈茂輝;;論民法上的注意義務[J];北方法學;2007年01期

7 董學立;論物權變動中的善意、惡意[J];中國法學;2004年02期

8 王利明;論無權處分[J];中國法學;2001年03期

9 孫憲忠;論不動產(chǎn)物權登記[J];中國法學;1996年05期

本文編號：1924013