發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-25 01:09

  本文選題：土地 + 房屋�。� 參考：《湖南大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：在我國(guó)法律制度下，房屋與土地是作為獨(dú)立的不動(dòng)產(chǎn)進(jìn)行對(duì)待的。2007年《中華人民共和國(guó)物權(quán)法》（以下簡(jiǎn)稱(chēng)《物權(quán)法》）頒布后，規(guī)定了房地產(chǎn)的“一并抵押”原則，但在實(shí)際操作過(guò)程中，卻存在著大量的房與地的分別抵押現(xiàn)象，對(duì)其性質(zhì)及效力的認(rèn)定，學(xué)術(shù)界和實(shí)務(wù)界有著不同的觀點(diǎn)。文中案例被告是一家房地產(chǎn)開(kāi)發(fā)公司，通過(guò)先向原告銀行抵押其土地使用權(quán)，再向獨(dú)立第三人抵押該土地上的建筑物獲得兩筆借款，最后因?yàn)闊o(wú)法償還借款而引發(fā)了糾紛。本案爭(zhēng)議焦點(diǎn)有三個(gè)，首先是兩次抵押權(quán)的效力的問(wèn)題；其次是兩銀行對(duì)未抵押登記的不動(dòng)產(chǎn)是否享有優(yōu)先受償?shù)臋?quán)利；最后是兩銀行受償?shù)南群箜樞蛉绾未_定�；�于法院認(rèn)定的事實(shí)和對(duì)現(xiàn)行法律的理解，房地分別抵押是當(dāng)事人雙方意思自治的產(chǎn)物，且其內(nèi)容不違反法律強(qiáng)制性規(guī)定，并依法辦理了登記，，因此有效。在保證房、地買(mǎi)受人為同一人時(shí)，債權(quán)人分別對(duì)其已登記抵押物享有優(yōu)先受償權(quán)，對(duì)未登記部分享有補(bǔ)充受償權(quán)利。但由于法律對(duì)房、地拍賣(mài)或折現(xiàn)權(quán)利主體是否為同一人并無(wú)強(qiáng)制性規(guī)定，因此現(xiàn)實(shí)生活中很可能造成房、地主體分離的現(xiàn)象，這就需要立法者予以注意和規(guī)范。
[Abstract]:Under the legal system of our country, housing and land are treated as independent immovable property. After the promulgation of the property Law of the people's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "Real right Law") in 2007, the principle of "mortgage" of real estate is stipulated. However, in the practical operation, there are a large number of houses and land mortgage phenomenon, the nature and effectiveness of the recognition, academic and practical circles have different views. In this case, the defendant, a real estate development company, secured his land use right to the plaintiff's bank first, then secured the building on the land by an independent third party, and finally caused a dispute because he could not repay the loan. There are three controversial issues in this case: first, the validity of the two mortgages; secondly, whether the two banks have the priority to be repaid to the unmortgaged real estate; and finally, how to determine the order in which the two banks are repaid. Based on the facts found by the court and the understanding of the current law, the separate mortgage of the premises is the product of the autonomy of the will of the parties, and its content does not violate the mandatory provisions of the law, and has been registered according to law, so it is effective. When the buyer is the same person, the creditor has the priority right to the registered mortgage and the supplementary right to the unregistered part. However, there is no compulsory stipulation on whether the subject of land auction or discount right is the same person, so it is very likely to cause the separation of house and land subject in real life, which needs the legislator to pay attention to and standardize it.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923.2;D922.29

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 孔博;;土地使用權(quán)與建筑物所有權(quán)的關(guān)系——兼評(píng)兩個(gè)物權(quán)法草案建議稿的相關(guān)設(shè)計(jì)[J];山東省農(nóng)業(yè)管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年04期

本文編號(hào)：1799073