학술논문
善意取得合同效力的立法解析与邏輯証成
이용수 48
- 영문명
- Logical Justification and Legislative Analysis of Contractual Validity on Which Bona Fide Acquisition Based
- 발행기관
- 한국재산법학회
- 저자명
- 彭诚 信(팽성신, PENG Chengxin)
- 간행물 정보
- 『재산법연구』財産法硏究 第26卷 第3號, 417~461쪽, 전체 45쪽
- 주제분류
- 법학 > 법학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2010.02.28
8,200원
구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.
국문 초록
영문 초록
1. Introduction
Why does the thesis talk about the contractual validity on which bona fide acquisition is based? There may be three main reasons as bellow:
Firstly, there is a potential conflict between Contract Law and Real Law in P. R. China.
According to article 51 of Contract Law, the obligatory contract is in pending effect. That is, the legal effect of the contract will be fixed by the ratification of true owner or after the unauthorized person obtains the right of disposal after making the contract. If the true owner ratifies the contract or the unauthorized person obtains the right of disposal after making the contract, the contract is effective or valid. In the situation, it is a normal transfer of property, no bona fide acquisition will happen. If the true owner does not ratify the contract or the unauthorized person does not obtain the right of disposal after making the contract, the contract is null and void. In this situation, the bona fide acquisition certainly will happen to bona fide transferee, but the acquisition is based on null and void contract.
But article 106 of Real Law does not mention the legal effect of the contract which bona fide acquisition is based on. If the article is regarded as valid contract just as this did happen, conflict now appears between the two Laws.
Secondly, the practical value of discussing the legal effect of the contract which bona fide acquisition is based on.
The issue can never be avoided, for it concerns the protection of two parties of the contract. That is, in what way and in what degree the two parties can be protected due to the different legal effect of the contract. For example, if the transferee (bona fide party) gets the ownership but does not pay the price, in what way can the unauthorized transferor claim the price? If the contract is valid, he or she can easily claim the payment. But, if the contract is null and void, the unauthorized transferor is very difficult to find a reasonable way to protect his or her benefit. In the other aspect, if the object thing which the transferee (bona fide party) received has substantial defects, in what way can he or she claim compensation from the unauthorized transferor? We can easily conclude that the validity of the contract plays important role to protect the two parties.
Thirdly, there were different legal arguments during the drafting Real Law about the issue in Mainland China.
There were totally seven drafts about Real Law before the law came into force. The first draft regards the contract as valid or pending effect. The second, third, fourth, and fifth draft set the contract as valid effect. The sixth and seventh draft did not mention or intentionally avoid the legal effect of the contract. From above mentioned, we can understand that legal effect of the bona fide acquisition contract is really arguable issue in Mainland China.
All the above‐mentioned disputes are keen on the legal effect of the bona fide acquisition contract. In order to resolve the issue, the thesis generalizes several correlative questions and purports to supply reasonable answers. First, what is the relationship between the legal effect of the contract and unauthorized disposition? Second, what is the logical relationship between the contract of bona fide acquisition and the general rule of transferring property right in Real Law of P. R. C.? Third, what is the relationship between public reliance of outward act and bona fide acquisition? Fourth, bona fide acquisition is original acquisition or derivative acquisition? The last part is to conclude the practical value of the validity of the bona fide acquisition contract.
2. The bona fide acquisition contract is valid based on the relationship between unauthorized disposition and the general theory of contract.
According to the requirements of a civil juristic act shall be met based on the statute law in P. R. C. or general theory of contract law, unauthorized dispositi
목차
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
- 信託受託者의 補償請求權에 관한 考察
- 통행지역권의 침해와 물권적 청구권
- 독일 보험계약법 제28조의 계약상의 간접의무에 대한 연구
- UCC에 관한 저작권적 고찰
- 다수당사자 채권관계에서의 분할주의원칙 제한을 위한 합리적 모색
- 여성의 종중구성원 자격
- 온라인디지털콘텐츠 이용과 소비자보호
- 중국 불법행위법(침권책임법)의 주요 내용과 특징
- 유엔국제물품매매법(CISG)상의 계약성립 규정과 그 보충가능성에 관한 검토
- 集合物論に関する2つの系譜
- 論知識産權法定原则
- 中国創意保護的法律困境与出路
- 컴퓨터 프로그램의 물성에 관한 재검토
- 善意取得合同效力的立法解析与邏輯証成
- 法律行爲的相對无效
- 유전자변형(GMO) 생산물로 인한 손해발생과 책임법리에 관한 연구
- 청구권에 관한 제척기간과 소멸시효
- 새로운 유럽공동체법 (Rome II Regulation)상 불법행위에 관한 준거법
- 元代民事法律制度之特征
- 将来債権譲渡の効力
- 한국 법무부의 성년후견제도에 관한 민법개정안
- 中国不动产物权的基本结构
- 中國 建設用地使用權의 出讓에 관한 法的 檢討
- 消費者定型化契約在台灣的管制現況
- 2009년도 한국재산법학회 학술활동 외
- EU 불법행위법 통일 논의와 동아시아에서의 통일 모색
참고문헌
관련논문
최근 이용한 논문
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!