论多重买卖的法律规制——兼评《买卖合同司法解释》第9、10条  

Legal Regulation of multiple Sales of Property——Comment on Article 9 and Article 10 of Judicial Interpretation of Sales Contract

作　　者：刘保玉[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京航空航天大学法学院,北京100191

出　　处：《法学论坛》2013年第6期22-32,共11页Legal Forum

基　　金：作者承担的国家哲学社会科学基金项目<民事实体法和程序法的制度衔接与规则协调>(08BFX070);山东省哲学社会科学规划项目<民事实体法和程序法的制度衔接与规则协调>(07JDB012)的阶段性成果之一

摘　　要：最高人民法院2012年发布的《买卖合同司法解释》第9条、第10条中,对动产多重买卖的履行顺序问题作出了专门规定,其中有诸多规则值得肯定。但其在特殊动产多重买卖的履行顺序中所创设的"交付的效力优于登记"的规则,与《物权法》的规定和登记对抗主义的旨趣有所背离;其在普通动产多重买卖的履行顺序中所采用的"付款在先规则"和"合同成立在先规则",则随意地破除了普通债权之间的平等性,缺乏相应的理论基础且无法在债法制度中一以贯之,不足为取;而拟定中的《物权法司法解释(一)》,在房屋多重转让中的权利保护顺位问题上,却仍拟沿袭"合同成立在先规则"。对此,应予检讨并加以修正,学界也应大胆探索更合理、妥适的处理方案。Judicial Interpretation of Sales Contract, issued by the Supreme People＇ s Court in 2012, has made special provisions in Article 9 and Article 10 for the order problem of performance in the multiple sales of personal property. In particular, some rules are worthwhile. However, in the order problem of performance in the multiple sales of special property, the effectiveness of the delivery is superior to the registration, which deviates from both the rule of Property Law and the resistance effect of registra tion. Also ＂payment prior rule＂ and ＂contract first rule＂, adopted in the order problem of performance in the multiple sales of ordinary personal property, which break the equality among the common claims, lack appropriate theoretical foundations and could not be carried out in the debt law with consistent. Besides, the judicial interpretation （a） of Property Law under the way, still tends to follow the ＂contract first rule＂ to solve the order problem of protection of rights in the multiple housing transfer. Therefore, these problems should be reviewed and amended, and academic circles should also explore more reasonable and prop er processing scheme.

关 键 词：多重买卖 一物数卖 合同履行的顺序 竞价及变价受偿规则 

分 类 号：D913[政治法律—民商法学]