【作者】 王婷婷；

【导师】 李宗录；

【作者基本信息】 山东科技大学 ， 民商法学， 2018， 硕士

【摘要】 随着经济的高速发展,关于房屋的限购政策层数不穷。出于满足自身利益的需要,不少人与他人协商一致后借用他人的名义购买房屋。由此引发的借名购房的纠纷。但是法律针对借名购房问题并没有明确规定,加上各法官理论和实务水平的差异,使得司法实践中同案不同判的现象频发。影响了社会交易秩序和当事人之间的利益。因此有必要对此类问题加以研究,以期对这一突出问题寻找合法兼合理的法律救济途径来均衡借名购房下各方当事人之间的利益。一方面,针对借名购房合同的性质,学术界有着不同的观点。由于借名购房不是专有的法律术语,借名购房合同也不是我国《合同法》规定的15种有名合同之一。所以应当根据实践中借名人和出名人之间的借名购房合同的内容以及借名人和出名人围绕该合同所进行的一系列法律行为来探索与之相近的法律规范。在直接借名购房下借名购房合同为无名合同且无相类似的合同予以规范,在间接借名购房下借名购房合同和委托合同相类似,可参照适用委托合同的相关规定。此外,关于借名购房合同的效力问题,当前司法界和学术界尚未形成统一的认识。应该严格遵循我国《合同法》第52条的规定来判定借名购房合同的效力。即借名购房合同只要在双方当事人意思表示真实时签订,对合同当事人就应当有约束力。不应该直接以政策为标准认定其无效,而是要根据法律和行政法规的强制性规定来判断借名购房合同的效力。另一方面,针对借名购房下房屋的的所有权归属,我国司法实践中既没有统一的审判标准,也没有具体的法律对此予以明确规定。笔者认为应该以《物权法》中关于不动产物权变动的原理来探讨借名购房下房屋的物权归属才不至于脱离立法本质。先明确借名购房合同仅仅是借名人和出名人之间的一种债权效力,并不是一种物权的效力。不涉及第三人时即不涉及借名购房合同与房屋买卖合同合同之外的当事人时,应当综合性的考虑到房屋类型等因素来解决真实权利人与名义权利人的利益冲突,同时考虑到《物权法解释一》第2条的内容,应注重保护实际权利人即借名人的利益。在涉及到第三人时,还应当考虑第三人善意与否。第三人善意的情况下,应当从保护交易安全的目的出发维护第三人的利益。更多还原

【Abstract】 With the rapid economic development,the number of home purchase policies is endless.In order to meet the needs of self-interest,many people negotiated with others and used the names of others to buy houses.This caused disputes over the purchase of homes.However,the law does not clearly stipulate the issue of the purchase of houses by name,and the differences in the theoretical and practical levels of the judges make the phenomenon of different judgments in the same case in judicial practice frequent.Affected the order of social transactions and the interests of the parties.Therefore,it is necessary to study such issues in order to seek legal and reasonable legal remedies for this outstanding problem to balance the interests of the parties involved in the purchase of the house.On the one hand,academia has different views on the nature of borrowing contracts.Since the purchase of homes by name is not a proprietary legal term,the home purchase contract is not one of the 15 well-known contracts stipulated in the Contract Law of China.Therefore,it should be based on the practice of borrowing the name between the celebrity and the name of the purchase contract and the use of celebrities and celebrities around the contract to conduct a series of legal acts to explore similar legal nonms.Under the name-purchase program,the name-purchase contract is regulated by an unnamed contract and there is no similar contract.In the case of indirect borrowing,the name-purchase contract is similar to the entrustment contract,and the relevant provisions of the applicable entrustment contract can be referred to.In addition,regarding the validity of the contract for the purchase of homes by name,the judiciary and academia have not yet formed a unified understanding.Strictly follow the provisions of Article 52 of the,Contract Law,of our country to determine the validity of a contract for the purchase of a named house.That is,if a contract for the purchase of a borrowed name is signed when the meaning of the two parties is true,it shall be binding on the parties to the contract.The policy should not be used as a criterion to determine that it is invalid,but it is necessary to judge the effectiveness of the contract by name in accordance with the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations.On the other hand,there is no uniform trial standard in the judicial practice in China for the ownership of the house under the name of the borrowed home,and there is no specific law to specify this.The author believes that the principle of real property rights change in the "Property Law" should be used to discuss the property ownership of houses under the name of the borrowed house so as not to deviate from the essence of legislation.It is clear that the first-named purchase contract 1s only a kind of creditor’s rights effect between the celebrity and the famous person.It is not a kind of real right effect.When a third party is not involved,it does not involve a party other than the contract for the purchase of the leased house and the contract for the sale of the house.It shall comprehensively consider the factors such as the type of the house to resolve conflicts of interest between the real right owner and the nominal right owner.The content of Article 2 of the "Property Rights Law Interpretation One" should pay attention to the protection of the actual rights holders by the interests of celebrities.When it comes to third parties,it should also consider whether third parties are good or not.In the case of a third person in good faith,the interests of third parties should be protected from the purpose of protecting the security of transactions.更多还原