善意取得合同效力的立法解析与逻辑证成  

Logical Justification and Legislative Analysis of Contractual Validity on Which Bona Fide Acquisition Based

作　　者：彭诚信[1,2] 李建华[2,3] 

机构地区：[1]宁波大学 [2]吉林大学法学院 [3]中国人民大学法学院博士后流动站

出　　处：《中国法学》2009年第4期85-101,共17页China Legal Science

摘　　要：善意取得合同效力的认定是解决善意取得在适用《物权法》第106条与《合同法》第51条时所面临各种可能冲突与相应理论困惑的逻辑前提。论文通过证成无权处分行为不影响合同效力得出善意取得合同为有效,并通过设定善意取得亦应遵循《物权法》中的一般物权变动模式(债权形式主义)而得出其所依据的合同也应为有效。论文还证成仅依善意取得合同的有效并不能保证善意第三人取得权利的绝对性,仍需要公示公信力实现善意取得物权的对世性,从而能够对抗原权利人的原物返还请求权。善意取得应遵守一般物权变动模式且善意取得合同有效的结论表明其性质应为继受取得。善意取得合同有效认定的多种实践优势表明,为了贯彻《物权法》与《合同法》在法律适用上的统一以及在未来立法中融入先进的法律理念,最好在《物权法》中把善意取得合同明确为有效并摒弃《合同法》中无权处分合同效力待定之规定。Well understanding contract effectiveness of bona fide acquisition is a logical presupposition to deal with the potential conflict and relatively theoretical confusion between article 106 of Property Law and article 51 of Contract Law during their application. The contract of bona fide acquisition should be valid since unauthorized disposition does not affect the validity of a contract. Since bona fide acquisition should follow the general nile of transferring property right which was stipulated in Property Law, the contract on which it was based hereby is valid. Even so, the validity of the contract can not secure the absoluteness of property right which the bona fide person acquired. The absoluteness still needs public reliance in public notification to secure the bona fide person by his declining the claim of restituting the thing of the original right - holder. Based on valid contract and following the general rule of transferring property right, the legal nature of bona fide acquisition should be derivative acquisition. Numbers of practical values of the validity of the contract show that it should be clearly confirmed in Property Law and the Article 51 of Contract Law should be expurgated during legislative amendment in the future.

关 键 词：无权处分 善意取得 公示公信 继受取得 

分 类 号：D923.6[政治法律—民商法学]