论文部分内容阅读
我国物权立法是否采用物权行为制度不应仅受制于理论的逻辑,尚需应有实用的考虑。基于此,新物权法在借鉴各国立法例的基础上,采纳了物权行为理论的区分原则,但并未完全采用德国法上的物权行为理论。在物权变动上,不仅需要作为物权变动原因的合同债权行为,还需要交付或登记的结合,即所谓的债权形式主义立法例。同时考虑到特殊性,例外采用意思主义,以登记或交付作为对抗要件。从总体上着眼,这种立法是比较符合我国国情的。
Whether the system of property rights should be adopted in legislation of real right in our country should not only be limited by the logic of theory, but should be considered practical. Based on this, the new Real Right Law adopts the principle of the distinction of real right behavior theory on the basis of borrowing the legislation of other countries, but it does not fully adopt the theory of real right behavior in German law. In the change of property rights, not only the contractual claims as the reasons for the change of real right but also the combination of delivery or registration are required, that is, the so-called legislation of debt formalism. Taking into account the special nature of the exception to adopt the doctrine of the registration or delivery as a counter-element. As a whole, this kind of legislation is more in line with China’s national conditions.