论所有权保留合同中天然孳息的归属——兼评《物权法》第116条与《合同法》163条  

A Discussion about the Owner of the Natural Fruits in the Ownership-reserved Contract — Comments on the Relationship between Section 116 of the Property Law and Section 163 of the Contract Law

作　　者：彭真明[1] 丁海江[1] 

机构地区：[1]华中师范大学法学院

出　　处：《社会科学》2014年第2期83-90,共8页Journal of Social Sciences

摘　　要：天然孳息的归属与原物所有权密不可分,《合同法》第163条规定的买卖合同孳息归属的"交付主义"规则以"所有权已经转移或者最终能转移至买受人"为适用前提,具有合理性。《物权法》第116条与《合同法》第163条并不冲突,所有权保留合同中天然孳息归属适用《合同法》第163条的结论符合民法精神,亦即"动产所有权保留,天然孳息所有权移转",且当事人约定优先。Who is the owner of the natural fruits is intimately associated with who owned the original. The legal rules used to judge who is the owner of the natural fruits in sales contract according to section 163 of the Contract Law is reasonable, which said the natural fruits belong to whom is decided by if the seller delivery the subject to the vendee. This article can only be used when the vendee has been the owner of the subject or the buyer can be the owner in law. The section 163 of the Contract Law and the section 116 of the Property Law are not conflicted. Who is the owner of the natural fruits in ownership-reserved contract should be judged by the section 163 of the Contract Law and the conclusion can reflect the spirit the civil law. In other words, when the ownership of subject is reserved, the buyer has been the owner of the natural fruits, only when the seller and the vendee has agreement.

关 键 词：所有权保留合同 天然孳息 归属 《合同法》第163条 

分 类 号：D913.2[政治法律—民商法学]