【作者】 蒋拯；

【导师】 谭启平；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 民商法学， 2012， 博士

【副题名】从权利保护与限制的视角

【摘要】 文章认为，我国应将“违法建筑”和“违章建筑”统称为“违法建筑”，具有必要性，符合客观事实。对违法建筑概念进行类型化分析，关涉违法建筑之处理，具有重大意义。违法建筑是建造行为违反公法之物，亦属民法上之物，是不动产，具有一定的社会危害性和价值性。在违法建筑处理制度构建时，不能为了遏制违法建筑而否认其作为不动产所有权客体的法律地位。否则，对物权法中所有权得丧变更规则及添附规则是一种伤害，势必损及民法之形式理性，危及合法建筑之保护。具体而言，由于某一幢建筑是合法建筑还是违法建筑，只有由有权机关依法定程序认定方能知晓。因此，应当肯认一体赋予建造行为能够原始取得所有权的规则，而不去追问是合法建筑还是违法建筑，否则会伤及对合法建筑之保护。国家在遏制违法建筑时，不能为了遏制而遏制，而应在尊重既有违法建筑资源价值的前提下作甄别处理。在违法建筑认定及处理中，要注重对公权进行限制，尊重违法建筑不动产所有权之客体地位，对私权给予应有保护。应加强建筑管制及违法建筑的查处力度，对新建违法建筑从严治理，利用征税的方法对违法建筑进行遏制，引入刑罚对违法建筑行为进行打击，对违法建筑应进行登记并允许移转。第一章，对违法建筑与违章建筑进行了语源考察及辨析。对建筑的概念进行了探讨，对中外历史上就建筑行为进行规范管理的历史进行了回顾，对“违章建筑”和“违法建筑”的概念进行了语源探析，对我国政府文件和法律性文件及主要大城市对违法建筑和违章建筑的规定进行了梳理，提出应将“违法建筑”、“违章建筑”统称为“违法建筑”。第二章，对违法建筑的定义问题进行了深入研究。通过批判现有的九种定义，认为违法建筑的定义应从我国的建筑管制立法、行政管理及司法实践中去分析提炼。只有基于我国建筑管制实践及理论现状，所作出的定义才能与建筑管制之实践相吻合，方能反过来指导实践，进一步认清违法建筑的本质。如果仅从学理上对违法建筑的定义进行研究，一是所作的定义不能很好地反映并指导实践。二是人为地制造了建筑管制法学界与建筑管理实务界的理论鸿沟。笔者在对我国建筑管制制度进行实证分析之后，认为违法建筑是指，未经规划许可、建设用地许可或建筑工程施工许可，并发给许可证(或批准书)，或虽经许可，但不按许可条件建造的建筑物。该定义具有高度的概括性与简洁性，具有良好的可操作性，符合我国建筑管制实际。笔者进而对违法建筑进行了类型化分析，将违法建筑按20个标准进行了类型化，并就违法建筑类型化对违法建筑处理的启示进行了探讨。第三章，对违法建筑进行了公私法定位分析及公私权互动研究，并对由此而就违法建筑处理制度构建得到的启示进行了探讨。对国家实行建筑管制涉及的用地审批、规划许可、建筑许可的必要性进行了论证。在对一些国家或地区关于违法建筑的有关规定进行梳理之后，发现有如下特点：一是每个国家或地区承担处理违法建筑职责的部门不尽一致。二是将工程分为小型工程和大中型工程，对小型工程相对放宽管理。三是承认程序违建之存在，允许依法按规定补办手续使程序违建变成合法建筑。四是强调违建人自行拆除或承担费用拆除违法建筑的义务(代履行)。五是将对建筑工程的管制细化为对相关人员的管理及责任追究。六是一般都利用刑罚对违法建筑行为进行遏制。七是有的国家或地区对违法建筑依法征税，补办手续准正成合法建筑时征税高于合法建筑。违法建筑是建造行为违反公法之物，是民法上之物，是不动产。违法建筑具有双重属性，即一定的社会危害性和价值性。文章对市民社会理论及其对违法建筑预防与处理制度构建之启示问题进行了研究，提出要加强公私法的联合规制，对建造违法建筑的阶层应进行利益分析及原因分析，充分发挥民间组织及基层群众性自治组织的作用。对公法与私法的划分，公私法之互动及其对违法建筑预防与处理制度构建的启示进行了分析。提出应注重公法之间、公法和私法之间以及私法之间的衔接与协力，完善责任体系，注重执法公平。对公权与私权的理论及其划分进行了探讨。认为公权与私权关系理论对违法建筑预防与处理制度构建的启示就是，在违法建筑预防与处理中，要知悉私权、尊重私权，知悉公权、限制公权，明确公权部门职责，确保公权之权源合法有据，使公权依法行使。最后，就诺齐克最小国家理论对违法建筑预防和处理的启示进行了探讨。第四章，着重对违法建筑能否成为不动产所有权客体问题进行了研究。首先对建筑物财产权的重要意义，土地的属性，土地所有权、建设用地使用权、宅基地使用权之相关问题以及土地与建筑物的权属关系进行了分析。探讨了所有权的基本理论以及建筑物所有权受到的限制。笔者进而认为，在论及违法建筑处理制度时，要对违法建筑的法律地位进行分析，对违法建筑能否成为所有权客体的问题进行论证。唯有如此，方能探知其权利归属，确定其责任主体，同时赋予主体一定的对抗公权力恣意性之权利。要处理违法建筑，其前提当然是厘清违法建筑上存在什么权利、违建人违反了什么规定，不管、不问违法建筑上的权利状况，不顾该违法建筑是否属程序违建，是否能准正，对违法建筑不于甄别，一律拆除的作法肯定不妥。由此可见，在处理违法建筑时，务必先认清违建人到底在违法建筑上存在什么权利。换言之，违法建筑到底能不能成为所有权客体？这当然成为研究违法建筑处理制度时必须要搞清楚的重大前置性问题。至于违法建筑之认定及处理，反过来成为依法行政之相对简单的问题。为此，笔者研究了违法建筑能否成为所有权客体与违法建筑处理制度构建的关系，对一些国家及地区对违法建筑能否成为所有权客体的规定进行了梳理，对我国现行法律就违法建筑能否成为权利客体的规定及态度进行了分析。对违法建筑能否成为所有权客体的几种理论观点进行了深入分析。最后，提出应当肯认违法建筑不动产所有权客体地位的几种理论及理由，建议利用“应有权利”的理论，“活法”的理论，“习惯法上物权”的理论来证成不动产所有权说。笔者列举了应当肯认违法建筑作为不动产所有权客体的八条理由，分别是：第一、我国《民法通则》和《物权法》并没有否认违法建筑能够成为所有权之客体。第二，赋予违建人违法建筑所有权，利于规范公权之行使及最大限度保护民事权利。第三、坚持因建造之事实行为能取得所有权之规则，赋予违建人违法建筑所有权，这是出于对民法形式理性之尊重。第四，否定违法建筑成为所有权之客体，与添附规则相背。第五，否认违法建筑能成为所有权之客体，不遵守建造能产生所有权的规则，则“按逐步完工状态买卖待建不动产制度”将无法建立。第六，肯认违法建筑不动产所有权客体地位与物权法定原则不冲突。第七，将合法建筑和违法建筑一体作为不动产所有权之客体，事关建筑物交易市场规则的统一建立与完善。第八，赋予违建人对违法建筑之所有权，对和谐社会建设及社会稳定有利。其实，肯认违法建筑不动产所有权之客体地位问题，最终将归结为立法时的利弊判断问题。最后就看法律怎么作出规定而已，法律规定是什么，它就是什么。本章的最后，笔者认为对权利取得规则与权利限制规则之间的关系，以及对违法建筑的认定和一体赋予建筑物所有权之间的关系应当有正确之认识，赋予违建人对违法建筑享有所有权不等于鼓励违法建筑，赋予违建人对违法建筑享有所有权与民法之让与所有权应予补偿的原则不相违背。第五章，对完善违法建筑处理制度提出了五点建议。文章认为，应加强建筑管制以及对违法建筑行为的查处力度，允许违法建筑登记并移转，对违法建筑征收相关税费，引入刑罚对违法建筑行为进行遏制。更多还原

【Abstract】 This paper holds that it is necessary and consistent with objective facts tocollectively refer illegal constructions and unapproved constructions as illegalconstructions. The typological analysis of the concept of illegal constructions isinvolved with the principle of treatment of illegal constructions and is of greatsignificance. Illegal constructions are the result of violation of public laws, theobject in the civil law and the real estate with certain social harmness and value.In the construction of treatment system for illegal constructions, we cannot denythe legal status of illegal constructions as real estate ownership object to curbillegal constructions, otherwise, such denial would harm acquisition, alterationand extermination rule and apposition rule of the ownership in property in thecivil law, damage the form rationality of the civil law and endanger theprotection of legal constructions. While curbing illegal constructions, thegovernment cannot curb for the sake of curbbing, but should treat such projectsseparately on the basis of respecting the value of the existing illegal constructions. In the recognition and treatment of illegal constructions, weshould attach great importance to restrict public rights and respect the objectstatus of real estate ownership of illegal constructions and grant the deservedprotection to private rights. We should strengthen administrative supervisionover constructions regulations, strictly control the newly constructed illegalconstructions, curb illegal constructions by the way of taxation and introduce thepenalties to combat illegal constructions, allow illegal constructions to beregistered and transferred.Chapter One discusses the definition of constructions, briefly reviews thepractices of control and management on the constructions in China and foreigncountries, makes etymological analysis on the concepts of illegal constructionsand unapproved constructions, combs the provisions of government files,regulative documents in law and the major cities on illegal constructions andunapproved constructions after China liberation and proposes that illegalconstructions and unapproved constructions should be collectively referred asillegal constructions. Chapter Two deeply researches the definition of illegal constructions. Bycriticizing the existing nine definitions, the author holds that the definitionshould be analyzed and refined on the basis of constructions regulationprovisions, administrative managements and judicial practices in China.Only ifthe definition is theoretical description of the constructions regulation practicesin China, it would be identical to the practices of constructions regulation. Onlyby this way can the definition conversely guide the practices and can the essenceof illegal constructions be further recognized. If we only research the definitionsof illegal constructions from the theory, such definitions cannot well reflect andguide the practices and artificially produce the theoretical great gulf fixedbetween the law circle of constructions regulation and the practice circle ofconstructions management. By empirical analysis of the system forconstructions regulation in China, the author indicates that illegal constructionsrefer to the constructions without planning permit, land use permit orconstructions permit of constructions while with license granted (or approval) orpermitted but not constructed on the basis of permissive conditions. This definition has a high degree of generality, simplicity and good maneuverability,is consistent with the practices of constructions regulation in China and is thereal summary of the practices thereof. The author further makes categorizedanalysis of illegal constructions on the basis of twenty standards and makes adiscussion on the enlightenment of the categorization of illegal constructions onthe treatment thereof.Chapter Three analyzes the postion of illegal constructions on public lawand private law and discusses the enlightenment thereof on the construction ofillegal construction processing system and analyze the necessity of land useapproval, planning permit and constructions permit involved in constructionscontrol of the country.After combing the relevant provisions of some countriesor regions on illegal constructions, the author concludes that: first, thedepartments in charge of illegal constructions in every country or region are notalways the same; second, constructions are divided into small constructions andlarge and medium constructions, with relatively loose management on theformer; third, constructions in violation of the procedures are recognized, which can be changed into legal constructions by making up the formalities inaccordance with law; fourth, it is emphasized that illegal constructors should beobliged to pull down illegal constructions of their own or on their expenses; fifth,the control over constructions is detailed as the management and responsibilityinvestigation on the relevant persons; sixth, the penalties are adopted to curbillegal constructions; seventh, some countries or regions collect the taxes onillegal constructions in accordance with law with more tax collected on legalconstructions which are changed from constructions in violation of proceduresby making up the formalities than originally legal constructions.The paper holds that illegal constructions are the result of violation ofpublic laws, the object in the civil law and the real estate with certain socialharmness and value. By researching civil society theory and its enlightenmenton prevention and control of illegal constructions, the author proposes that weshould strengthen the coordinative regulation between public laws and privatelaws, analyze the classes who construct illegal constructions from theperspective of benefits and reasons and give full play to the role of civilian organizations and autonomous organizations of base masses. By analyzing thedivision between public laws and private laws, the interaction between those twoand their enlightenment on prevention and control of illegal constructions, theauthor proposes that we should attach great importance to combination andcoordination between public laws, between public laws and private laws andbetween private laws, improve liability system and pay attention to the fairnessin law enforcement and discuss the theories of public rights and private rightsand the division between them.The author holds that the enlightenment of thetheories of public rights and private rights on the constructions of prevention andtreatment of illegal constructions is that in the prevention and treatment ofillegal constructions, we should be well aware of private rights and respectprivate rights, be well aware of public rights and restrict public rights, explicitthe functions of the departments with public rights,make sure the power sourceis legal,exercise public powers legally.and Finally, the author discusses theenlightenment of the minimal state of Nozick on prevention and treatment ofillegal constructions. Chapter Four researches the issue whether illegal constructions can be realestate ownership object.The first part analyzes the significance of property rightsof constructions, the attribute of land, the ownership of land,the issues releventwith construction land use rights,land use rights,ownership relations betweenland and constructions and basic theories of ownership and the restriction of theownership of constructions;the second part focuses on the research on the issuewhether illegal constructions can be real estate ownership object. The authorholds that when it comes to the treatment of illegal constructions, we shouldanalyze the legal status of illegal constructions and demonstrate whether illegalconstructions can be right object. Only in this way can we ascertain their rightownership, determine their subject of liability and entitle certain rights to thesubject to withstand the arbitrariness of public rights. The treatment of illegalconstructions should be based on the differentiation of the rights and provisionsviolated in illegal constructions and it is improper to neglect the right status ofillegal constructions, to ignore whether illegal constructions fall intoconstructions in violation of procedures and if it is the case, whether such projects can be corrected and to pull down illegal constructions withoutdifferentiation. It can be seen that in the treatment of illegal constructions, wemust recognize what rights illegal constructors have on illegal constructions,that is to say, whether illegal constructions can be right object and if it is thecase, what rights’ object such projects can be, which certainly becomes theimportant precedent issue to be cleared in the research on the treatment of illegalconstructions; the recognition and treatment of illegal constructions converselybecomes relatively simple in the administration in accordance with law. To thisend, the author researches the relationship between whether illegal constructionscan be right object and the constructions of the treatment of illegal constructions,combs the provisions of some countries and regions on whether illegalconstructions can be ownership object, analyzes the provisions and attitudes ofthe exiting laws in China on whether illegal constructions can be right object,deeply analyzes several theoretical points on whether illegal constructions canbe ownership object and finally proposes that we should recognize severaltheories and reasons of the status of the real estate ownership object of illegal constructions and suggest using the theory of vested rights, the theory of livinglaw and the theory of property rights in common law to demonstrate the realestate ownership. The author enumerates the nine reasons for the recognition ofillegal constructions as the real estate ownership object: first, the GeneralProvisions of the Civil Law and the Property law in China do not deny illegalconstructions can be the ownership object; second, the ownership of illegalconstructions entitled to illegal constructors is conducive to the implementationof public laws and the maximum protection of civil rights; third, the upholdingof the principle of the acquisition of ownership by the fact of construction andthe entitlement of the ownership of illegal constructions to illegal constructorsare to respect the form rationality of the civil law; fourth, the denial of illegalconstructions as ownership object is contrary to apposition rule; fifth, the denialof illegal constructions as ownership object and the nonobservance of theprinciple that the constructions is to produce the ownership enable the systemfor buying and selling real estate to be constructed according to gradualcompletion not to be established; sixth, the recognition of illegal constructions as ownership object is not in conflict with numerus clauses of property rights;seventh, the recognition of legal constructions and illegal constructions asownership object is related to unified establishment and improvement of therules for trading market of constructions; eighth, the entitlement of theownership of illegal constructions to illegal constructors is conducive to thebuilding of harmonious society and social steadiness; Actually, the recognitionof the object status of real estate ownership of illegal constructions is a judgmenton advantages and disadvantages in legislation. In brief, the issue whether illegalconstructions can be ownership object depends on the provisions of the law.Finally the author holds that we should have the correct cognition about therelationship between the rules of rights acquisition and rights restrictions and therelationship between the cognizance of illegal constructions and endow themownership.Endowing ownership to the illegal constructions is not equal toencourage illegal constructions and does not run counter to the princinpal offorcing to transfer ownership should compensate in civil law.Chapter Five proposes five suggestions for the improvement of the processing system of illegal constructions. The author holds that we shouldstrengthen the supervision over the constructions, allow illegal constructions tobe transferred and registered, collect the relevant taxes on illegal constructionsand introduce the penalties to curb illegal constructions.更多还原