【作者】 唐棠；

【导师】 张晓远；

【作者基本信息】 四川大学 ， 法律硕士（法学）（专业学位）， 2021， 硕士

【摘要】 随着我国经济的高速发展,房价也保持持续升高的趋势,成为年轻人难以独立负担的高价值财产。然而按照社会传统观念,子女成年即将走进婚姻,或是已经走进婚姻后,房屋又是子女家庭稳定生活的重要保障。面对这一刚性需求与经济压力的矛盾,父母出资为子女购房便逐渐成为社会普遍现象。出于父母子女的血缘亲情,多数情况下父母出资时并未打算要求子女归还该出资,而这样一种亲子间的赠与行为,也不会特意留下书面证据予以明确。但当购房问题牵扯到子女的另一半时,父母不甚明确的出资行为就变得复杂起来。父母的出资是赠与还是借款,赠与对象是谁,父母出资所购房屋的产权应归属于谁,这些问题往往在子女婚姻解体时爆发,为财产归属的认定带来诸多困难,成为司法实践中争议较多的问题。为统一该类纠纷的司法裁量,最高人民法院曾在原《婚姻法解释(二)》《婚姻法解释(三)》中对父母为子女购房争议的处理方式进行了规定,然而由于两者规定存在一定程度的冲突,以父母出资及产权办理情况来认定所购房屋产权归属的认定标准也引发了巨大的争议,致使司法实践中个案的裁判分歧仍然很大,并且对于社会的价值引导也产生了不良影响。2021年《民法典》施行的同时,最高人民法院出台了《民法典婚姻家庭编解释(一)》,其中第29条再次对父母为子女购房的问题进行规定,重新回归我国婚后所得共同制精神,对父母出资的归属做出了较为合理的规定。然而虽然取得了一定的进步,但该条规定并未明确父母出资所购房屋产权的归属规则,未来的司法实践中可能仍会出现房屋归属认定标准的争议,因此有必要进一步完善立法。鉴于房屋一般是一个家庭中最为重要、价值最高的财产,其归属往往是争议的焦点,因此立足于婚后所得共同制精神来明确其归属认定规则,对于促进婚姻家庭幸福以及社会和谐有着重要意义。为解决这一问题,本文从父母出资的性质、出资的赠与对象、所购房屋的产权归属进行递进式分析讨论,立足于我国婚后所得共同制精神,以结婚时点为界,提出婚姻法与财产法的衔接方案,进一步提出父母为子女所购房屋产权的归属规则,对现行立法规定提出完善建议,为未来司法实践中正确认定事实、准确适用法律提供支撑。本文将从四个部分对此问题进行探讨:第一部分为父母为子女购房概述。首先对父母出资行为的伦理背景进行简述,提出该问题产生的社会成因。其次对父母为子女购房的情形进行分类,针对不同类型提出实务中存在的主要争议点。再次,针对当前新旧司法解释更替的情况,对原司法解释存在的问题、现行司法解释的合理性与不足进行分析,提出法律规定层面需要厘清的问题。最后,分析父母为子女购房的法律适用现状,指出实践中存在的问题。第二部分为父母出资性质的认定。首先,对父母出资性质的主流分类进行分析,提出父母出资在约定不明的情况下视为赠与的合理性。然后,对父母出资赠与对象的推定标准,从婚后受赠财产的基本归属原则出发,分析父母出资时的真实意图,并提出以外化行为推定父母意思表示的弊端,得出婚后父母出资原则上应视为赠与子女夫妻双方的结论,同时提出特殊情形下对出资父母的救济方法。第三部分为父母出资所购房屋归属的认定。首先,以结婚时点为界,分别对婚前、婚后父母出资为子女所购房屋产权的归属进行分类讨论,分析其中的争议点。然后,对父母出资购房行为中的赠与物进行分析界定,对不同购房时间房屋产权归属认定的不同理论依据进行探讨,并据此提出婚前父母出资所购房屋的归属应以产权登记为准,婚后父母出资所购房屋的归属应以夫妻共同共有为原则的观点。第四部分为父母为子女购房房屋归属的立法完善建议。从明确父母出资的性质应视为赠与,明确父母出资赠与夫妻一方的应保障夫妻另一方对此知晓,明确父母所购房屋产权归属应按照婚前婚后分别确立归属认定原则三个方面提出对《民法典婚姻家庭编解释(一)》第29条的完善建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 With the rapid development of my country’s economy,housing prices have also maintained a continuous upward trend,becoming a high-value property that young people cannot afford independently.However,according to traditional social concepts,when children are about to enter marriage as adults,or after they have entered marriage,housing is an important guarantee for the stable life of children’s families.Faced with this contradiction between rigid demand and economic pressure,parents’ funding to buy houses for their children has gradually become a common phenomenon in society.Due to the blood kinship of the parents and children,in most cases,the parents did not intend to require the children to return the capital when making the investment,and such a gift between parents and children would not specifically leave written evidence to make it clear.But when the problem of buying a house involves the other half of the children,the parents’ unclear funding behavior becomes complicated.Whether the parent’s contribution is a gift or a loan,who is the recipient of the gift,and to whom the property rights of the house purchased by the parents should belong,these issues often erupt when the child’s marriage is disintegrated,causing many difficulties in determining the ownership of the property and becoming a dispute in judicial practice More questions.In order to unify the judicial discretion of this type of dispute,the Supreme People’s Court has stipulated in the original "Marriage Law Interpretation(Ⅱ)" and "Marriage Law Interpretation(Ⅲ)" how parents should deal with disputes over buying houses for their children.However,the two provisions have a certain degree Conflict,the determination of the ownership of the purchased house based on the parent’s contribution and the handling of the property rights has also caused huge controversy.As a result,the judgment of individual cases in judicial practice is still very different,and it has also had a negative impact on the value guidance of the society.At the same time the Civil Code came into effect in 2021,the Supreme People’s Court promulgated the "Interpretation(Ⅰ)of the Marriage and Family Book of the Civil Code".Article 29 stipulates the issue of parents buying houses for their children and returns to the joint system of post-marital income.Makes a more reasonable regulation on the ownership of the parent’s capital.However,although some progress has been made,this provision does not clarify the ownership rules of the property rights of the houses purchased by parents.In the future judicial practice,there may still be disputes about the determination of house ownership.Therefore,it is necessary to further improve the legislation.Since houses are generally the most important and most valuable property in a family,their ownership is often the focus of controversy.Therefore,clarifying the rules of ownership based on the spirit of the common system of income after marriage is of great significance for promoting the happiness of marriage and family and social harmony.In order to solve this problem,this article conducts a progressive analysis and discussion on the nature of the parent’s contribution,the recipient of the contribution,and the ownership of the purchased house.Based on the spirit of the common system of income after marriage in China,the marriage law is proposed based on the time of marriage.The plan for linking up with the property law further proposes the ownership rules of the property rights of the houses purchased by parents for their children,and puts forward perfect suggestions in the current legislative provisions,so as to provide support for the correct identification of facts and accurate application of the law in future judicial practice.This article will discuss this issue from four parts:The first part is an overview of the problem of parents buying houses for their children.First,briefly describe the ethical background of parental funding behavior,and put forward the social causes of the problem.Secondly,it classifies the situations in which parents buy houses for their children,and puts forward the main dispute points in practice for different types.Third,in view of the current situation of the replacement of the old and new judicial interpretations,it analyzes the existing problems of the original judicial interpretations,the rationality and deficiencies of the current judicial interpretations,and puts forward the issues that need to be clarified at the level of legal provisions.Finally,it analyzes the current status of the law applicable to parents buying houses for their children,and points out the problems in practice.The second part is about the determination of the nature of parental contributions.First,analyze the mainstream classification of the nature of parental contributions,and propose the rationality of parental contributions as a gift if the agreement is not clear.Then,the presumption standard for the objects of parental donation,starting from the basic attribution principle of the donated property after marriage,analyzes the true intentions of the parents at the time of capital contribution,and proposes the malpractice of the presumption of parental intentions expressed by the externalization behavior,and the principle of parental contribution after marriage The above should be regarded as the conclusion of the gift of the children and the couple,and proposes the relief method for the sponsoring parents under special circumstances.The third part is about the determination of the ownership of the house purchased by the parents.First,taking the time of marriage as the boundary,classify and discuss the ownership of the property rights of the houses purchased by parents for their children before and after marriage,and analyze the disputed points.Then,it analyzes and defines the gifts in the purchase behavior of the parents’ investment,and discusses the different theoretical basis for the determination of the ownership of the house at different times of house purchase,and proposes that the ownership of the house purchased by the parents before marriage should be subject to the property right registration.The ownership of the house purchased by the later parents should be based on the principle of joint ownership by the husband and wife.The fourth part is a legislative improvement proposal for parents to purchase houses for their children.To clarify the nature of parent’s contribution should be regarded as a gift,clarify that the criteria for determining parent’s contribution to a spouse should be the joint confirmation of both spouses,and clarify the ownership of the house purchased by the parents should be based on the three aspects of the principle of attribution determination before marriage and after marriage.Suggestions for perfecting Article 29 of the " Interpretation(Ⅰ)of the Marriage and Family Book of the Civil Code ".更多还原