典权入典的体系归属与制度设计
|
摘要
典权制度是我国固有的传统法律制度,我国《民法典物权编(草案)》却一贯地对其未予规定。在典权案件的审判实践中,立法的缺失容易导致同案异判,这会极大地损害法律的稳定性。事实上,典权的制度构造符合公平原则的精神,典权制度的文化基因虽然已发生变化但并未消失,典权制度功能的独特性不宜被不动产质权所取代,这些可以构成证成典权入典正当性的理由。至于典权如何入典,涉及到体系定位和具体制度安排的技术性问题。从体系上而言,典权宜安排在用益物权编,典权制度之下的法律规范主要包括典权的标的物、典权的设立方式、典权的期限、续典、转典与转租、回赎权、找贴权等主要内容。
Pawning right system is a traditional legal system in China, while it has long been neglected in the Draft for Comment of the present Civil Code of China. According to empirical statistics, however, the number of pawning right cases has maintained a relatively stable scale in China in recent years. Due to the lack of legislation, the trial of pawning right cases is likely to lead to different judgments on similar cases, which will greatly impair the stability of the law. Despite the similar case's needs, there has been a continued controversy among scholars and legislators about whether the pawning rights have been entered into the code. Among those major reasons for opposing the enshrinement is the theoretical inconsistency, which can be refuted by cultural interpretation, system analysis, and teleological discussion in sequence. How to enter the code involves technical issues such as system positioning and specific institutional arrangements. As a whole, the code should be arranged in the system of usufructuary right, and the design of the specific system should fully consider the customs, and the "civil law" in Taiwan is a typical example to be referred to.
Pawning right system is a traditional legal system in China, while it has long been neglected in the Draft for Comment of the present Civil Code of China. According to empirical statistics, however, the number of pawning right cases has maintained a relatively stable scale in China in recent years. Due to the lack of legislation, the trial of pawning right cases is likely to lead to different judgments on similar cases, which will greatly impair the stability of the law. Despite the similar case's needs, there has been a continued controversy among scholars and legislators about whether the pawning rights have been entered into the code. Among those major reasons for opposing the enshrinement is the theoretical inconsistency, which can be refuted by cultural interpretation, system analysis, and teleological discussion in sequence. How to enter the code involves technical issues such as system positioning and specific institutional arrangements. As a whole, the code should be arranged in the system of usufructuary right, and the design of the specific system should fully consider the customs, and the "civil law" in Taiwan is a typical example to be referred to.
引文
[1] 全国人民代表大会常务委员会法制工作委员会民法室.物权法立法背景与观点全集[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[2] 王利明.我国民法典物权编的修改与完善[J].清华法学,2018(2).
[3] 崔建远.民法分则物权编立法研究[J].中国法学,2017(2).
[4] 梁慧星.中国物权法研究(下册)[M].北京:法律出版社,1998.
[5] 陈甦.民法总则评注(上册)[M].北京:法律出版社,2017.
[6] 江海,石冠彬.论买卖合同风险负担规则——《合同法》第142条释评[J].现代法学,2013 (5).
[7] 史尚宽.物权法论[M].中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[8][日]我妻荣.我妻荣民法讲义Ⅲ:新订担保物权法[M].申政武等,译.北京:中国法制出版社,2008.
[9]温世杨.从物权法到物权编——我国用益物权制度的完善[J].法律科学,2018(6).
[10]王利明.物权法论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
[11]刘江琴.房屋典契履行中的若干法律问题之探析[J].法学评论,2002(1).
[12][德]萨维尼.论立法与法学的当代使命[M].许章润译.北京:中国法制出版社,2001.
(1)笔者以“典权”为关键词在裁判文书网上进行搜索,除去一些干扰因素,与典权有直接联系的案件数额为:2014年60件,2015年51件,2016年57件,2017年47件。
(2)参见(2016)甘0921民初第1272号《民事判决书》。
(3)参见(2016)宁02民终1004号《民事判决书》。
[2] 王利明.我国民法典物权编的修改与完善[J].清华法学,2018(2).
[3] 崔建远.民法分则物权编立法研究[J].中国法学,2017(2).
[4] 梁慧星.中国物权法研究(下册)[M].北京:法律出版社,1998.
[5] 陈甦.民法总则评注(上册)[M].北京:法律出版社,2017.
[6] 江海,石冠彬.论买卖合同风险负担规则——《合同法》第142条释评[J].现代法学,2013 (5).
[7] 史尚宽.物权法论[M].中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[8][日]我妻荣.我妻荣民法讲义Ⅲ:新订担保物权法[M].申政武等,译.北京:中国法制出版社,2008.
[9]温世杨.从物权法到物权编——我国用益物权制度的完善[J].法律科学,2018(6).
[10]王利明.物权法论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
[11]刘江琴.房屋典契履行中的若干法律问题之探析[J].法学评论,2002(1).
[12][德]萨维尼.论立法与法学的当代使命[M].许章润译.北京:中国法制出版社,2001.
(1)笔者以“典权”为关键词在裁判文书网上进行搜索,除去一些干扰因素,与典权有直接联系的案件数额为:2014年60件,2015年51件,2016年57件,2017年47件。
(2)参见(2016)甘0921民初第1272号《民事判决书》。
(3)参见(2016)宁02民终1004号《民事判决书》。