【摘要】：抵押是我國(guó)擔(dān)保法中規(guī)定的一種重要的擔(dān)保方式,其在市場(chǎng)交易活動(dòng)中具有舉足輕重的地位。實(shí)踐中,抵押制度主要涉及不動(dòng)產(chǎn)與動(dòng)產(chǎn)抵押物的轉(zhuǎn)讓問(wèn)題。所謂抵押物的轉(zhuǎn)讓,是指作為債務(wù)人的抵押人為了擔(dān)保債權(quán)人的債權(quán)的實(shí)現(xiàn)在某財(cái)產(chǎn)上設(shè)定抵押,隨后又對(duì)該抵押物自由處分,將其轉(zhuǎn)讓給買受人的行為。抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓后,在抵押權(quán)人與抵押物買受人之間往往會(huì)產(chǎn)生利益沖突,如何保障交易安全,維護(hù)其合法權(quán)益都是需要法律制度來(lái)維護(hù)的。我國(guó)抵押物的轉(zhuǎn)讓制度主要體現(xiàn)在《物權(quán)法》第191條之中,但是該法條的規(guī)定并不科學(xué)。本文先從我國(guó)目前的抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓的現(xiàn)實(shí)狀況入手,再結(jié)合主要的大陸法系國(guó)家如德國(guó)、法國(guó)和日本關(guān)于抵押物的轉(zhuǎn)讓問(wèn)題中所涉及的典型的制度模式,期望對(duì)我國(guó)的抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓制度中買受人的利益保護(hù)有一定的啟發(fā)。本文主要分為三部分:第一部分主要是通過(guò)《物權(quán)法》第191條的規(guī)定對(duì)我國(guó)目前抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓方面存在的問(wèn)題的概述。我國(guó)對(duì)抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓采取的是要經(jīng)過(guò)抵押權(quán)人同意的限制模式,該模式存在雖然有一定的合理之處,但限制抵押人轉(zhuǎn)讓抵押物的規(guī)定不僅沒(méi)有必要而且是有很多弊端的;受讓人的代位清償制度存在缺陷,該制度適用范圍是有限的,而且《物權(quán)法》中關(guān)于替代清償制度態(tài)度也很不明確。我國(guó)目前的抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓制度中沒(méi)有專門規(guī)定抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓中買受人的救濟(jì)或保護(hù)機(jī)制,對(duì)抵押物買受人保護(hù)的缺失,影響了正常的交易安全。第二部分重點(diǎn)是對(duì)國(guó)外抵押物買受人權(quán)益保護(hù)方法的分析。如法國(guó)的滌除權(quán)制度,日本的滌除權(quán)制度、抵押權(quán)消滅請(qǐng)求制度以及既承認(rèn)抵押權(quán)的追及效力又規(guī)定先取特權(quán)的“雙重主義”立法模式,德國(guó)允許抵押物的自由流通轉(zhuǎn)讓以及完善的抵押權(quán)登記公示制度。第三部分提出在抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓中如何保障善意買受人權(quán)益的建議。放寬對(duì)抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓的限制是基于立法價(jià)值的選擇,不動(dòng)產(chǎn)統(tǒng)一登記制度對(duì)抵押物買受人權(quán)利的保護(hù)具有重要意義,是市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的必然要求,也是實(shí)務(wù)經(jīng)驗(yàn)的結(jié)果。從滌除權(quán)制度產(chǎn)生的原因以及運(yùn)作情況、物權(quán)變動(dòng)模式與法律傳統(tǒng)的差異分析出滌除權(quán)制度在我國(guó)不適用,沒(méi)有必要引進(jìn),在動(dòng)產(chǎn)抵押物轉(zhuǎn)讓中可以采用“先代位后追及”的制度構(gòu)造等。
[Abstract]:Mortgage is an important guarantee mode stipulated in China's guarantee law, and it plays an important role in market transactions. In practice, the mortgage system mainly involves the transfer of real estate and chattel collateral. The so-called transfer of collateral refers to the act that the mortgagor as the debtor establishes a mortgage on a property for the purpose of securing the creditor's claim and then freely dispenses the mortgaged property and transfers it to the buyer. After the transfer of mortgaged property, there will often be conflicts of interest between mortgagee and mortgagee. It is necessary to protect the legal rights and interests of the mortgagee in order to protect the security of transactions and the legal rights and interests of the mortgagee. The transfer system of mortgaged property in our country is mainly embodied in Article 191 of property Law, but the provisions of this Law are not scientific. This article starts with the current situation of the transfer of collateral in our country, and then combines the typical institutional models involved in the transfer of collateral in the major civil law countries such as Germany, France and Japan. It is expected to give some inspiration to the buyer's interest protection in the mortgage transfer system of our country. This paper is divided into three parts: the first part is a summary of the problems existing in the transfer of mortgaged property in China through the provisions of Article 191 of the property Law. In our country, the transfer of mortgagee is restricted by the consent of the mortgagor. Although there are some reasonable points in this mode, the regulation of restricting the transfer of mortgagee is not only unnecessary but also has many disadvantages. The system of subrogation of assignees has defects, the scope of application of the system is limited, and the attitude of alternative settlement system in the property Law is not clear. There is no special relief or protection mechanism for the buyer in the transfer of collateral in the current mortgage transfer system in our country. The absence of protection to the buyer of the mortgage affects the normal security of the transaction. The second part focuses on the analysis of foreign collateral buyer's rights and interests protection methods. Such as France's elimination system, Japan's removal system, mortgage elimination claim system, and the "dualism" legislative model that recognizes the effectiveness of mortgage rights and provides for pre-emptive privileges, as well as a "dualistic" legislative model that recognizes the effectiveness of mortgage rights and provides for pre-emptive privileges. Germany allows the free circulation of collateral transfer and a sound mortgage registration public system. The third part proposes how to protect the interests of bona fide buyers in the transfer of collateral. The relaxation of the restriction on the transfer of mortgaged property is based on the choice of legislative value. The unified registration system of real estate is of great significance to the protection of the rights of buyers of mortgaged property. It is the inevitable requirement of the development of market economy and the result of practical experience. From the reason of the system of eliminating right and its operation, the difference between the mode of change of property right and the tradition of law, it is concluded that the system of eliminating right is not applicable in our country, and there is no need to introduce it. In the transfer of chattel collateral, the system structure of "subrogation and pursuit" can be adopted.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 梅樹森;田學(xué)蘊(yùn);;我們是怎樣處理買受人請(qǐng)求更名的[J];中國(guó)拍賣;2003年12期

2 婁杰海;論房屋二重買賣中對(duì)前買受人利益的保護(hù)[J];安陽(yáng)師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年06期

3 何江;;拍賣成交后變更買受人的法律探討[J];中國(guó)拍賣;2004年09期

4 ;買受人拒付房款能否作為悔拍處理?[J];中國(guó)拍賣;2005年04期

5 劉國(guó)強(qiáng);房屋二重買賣中對(duì)前買受人利益的保護(hù)[J];鄭州航空工業(yè)管理學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年01期

6 何昕;;買受人放棄標(biāo)的怎么辦[J];中國(guó)拍賣;2006年04期

7 傅淑華;;廢舊物資拍賣筆記——依法應(yīng)對(duì)買受人變更拍賣主體請(qǐng)求[J];中國(guó)拍賣;2008年09期

8 王平;;商品房預(yù)售中買受人合法權(quán)益保護(hù)研究[J];建筑經(jīng)濟(jì);2008年04期

9 林靖;;案例四:藝術(shù)品拍賣,買受人應(yīng)為自己的眼力買單[J];中國(guó)拍賣;2009年10期

10 張藝馨;;“一房二賣”中惡意次買受人利益保護(hù)問(wèn)題探討[J];臨沂師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年04期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前2條

1 蔣飛;;論房屋二重買賣中先買受人的物權(quán)實(shí)現(xiàn)——以后買賣合同效力認(rèn)定為視角的分析[A];探索社會(huì)主義司法規(guī)律與完善民商事法律制度研究——全國(guó)法院第23屆學(xué)術(shù)討論會(huì)獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)撐募ㄏ拢C];2011年

2 賽日;;律師在商品房預(yù)售中為當(dāng)事人提供服務(wù)時(shí)應(yīng)注意的法律問(wèn)題初探[A];中國(guó)民商法實(shí)務(wù)論壇論文集[C];2005年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 丁玉俊;被執(zhí)行房產(chǎn)未過(guò)戶買受人能否提異議[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2013年

2 劉長(zhǎng)勝;疏忽的代價(jià)[N];中國(guó)商報(bào);2007年

3 劉惠紅 記者 張恒;慎簽被開發(fā)商刪改的合同[N];中國(guó)消費(fèi)者報(bào);2004年

4 河南省安陽(yáng)市北關(guān)區(qū)人民法院 宋萍　張明裕;如何理解分期付款合同的解除條件[N];人民法院報(bào);2009年

5 王峰;延期移交標(biāo)的損失誰(shuí)承擔(dān)[N];中國(guó)商報(bào);2007年

6 ;住宅面積與住宅計(jì)價(jià)方式[N];商洛日?qǐng)?bào);2008年

7 凌勇;一房數(shù)賣中買受人的優(yōu)先原則[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2003年

8 魏?jiǎn)?將信用付款引入拍賣[N];中國(guó)經(jīng)營(yíng)報(bào);2001年

9 張旭;拍賣物是否抵押與買受人無(wú)關(guān)[N];中國(guó)商報(bào);2012年

10 劉宏誠(chéng);貸款買房警惕合同陷阱[N];中國(guó)證券報(bào);2003年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 翟云嶺;分期付款買賣中的買受人利益保護(hù)研究[D];對(duì)外經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 靳耀欣;房屋多重買賣中買受人的法律保護(hù)[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué);2007年

2 隆麗麗;期房買受人面臨的欺詐風(fēng)險(xiǎn)之法律問(wèn)題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年

3 李t;論商品房買受人的法律風(fēng)險(xiǎn)與防范[D];中南大學(xué);2011年

4 黃婕;分期付款中買受人利益保護(hù)[D];華東政法大學(xué);2014年

5 萬(wàn)華棟;論商品房預(yù)售中買受人的法律風(fēng)險(xiǎn)與對(duì)策[D];四川大學(xué);2007年

6 陸露;一物二賣（不動(dòng)產(chǎn)）中對(duì)于先買受人的法律保護(hù)制度[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

7 王涵敏;論“兇宅”買受人在合同法中的最佳救濟(jì)途徑[D];上海交通大學(xué);2014年

8 陳小青;商品房預(yù)售之買受人權(quán)利保護(hù)研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2007年

9 趙晨;分時(shí)度假中買受人權(quán)利研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2007年

10 郭然;北京市商品房預(yù)售合同示范文本研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2466759