物权的本质  

The Nature of Property Rights

作　　者：张永健[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]台湾中研院法律学研究所 [2]台湾中研院法实证研究中心

出　　处：《南京大学法律评论》2014年第1期185-200,共16页Nanjing University Law Review

摘　　要：物权的本质为何，千百年来吸引许多私法学者尝试提出一家之言。然而，大陆法系多数学者执着干物权乃人与物之关系，走入歧途；普通法主流学者把物权看成一束权利，同样是打迷糊仗。本文主张物权（或本文之名词“财产权”）有三种核心效力：对世、排他、追及。任何与物有关之权利若具备三种核心效力，就是物权。财产是人与人间关于物之法律关系之组合，而非人对物之关系。此种财产关系又可分成四种典型：人对国家、人对定限物权人、人对特定人如邻居、人对所有其他人。除了人面对国家徵收高权时外，财产关系都有或强或弱的排他本质；而此关系乃自动生成，此正是对世效力之本意。追及效力虽然有时隐而未显，但在财产权移转时会当然发挥作用。此外，所有权是财产权，但非后者之同义词。所有权（而非物权）才是一束权能。The nature of property rights has been under dispute for hundreds of years. Still, there is no consensus. Most scholars in the civil law tradition consider property fights to be relations between persons and things, a view that I contend is wrong. The mainstream property theory in the common law system--misleadingly--depicts property as a bundle of rights. This article argues that property rights have three core elements：in rem, fight to exclude, and running with assets. Any fight that contains these three elements in full is a property right. Property is a bundle of legal relations between persons regarding things,rather than a relation between a person and a thing. There are four prototypical property relations： holders of property interests versus （ 1 ） the state; （ 2 ） holders of （ other ） lesser property interests ; （3） specific parties such as neighbors; and （ 4 ） all others. Except when a holder of property interests is facing the state wielding its eminent domain power, the fight to exclude more or less implied in a property relation. This kind of relation is created automatically--the definition of in rem. Running with assets is not always explicit, but is a necessary feature when property interests change hand. Finally, ownership is a type of property fights, but it is not coterminous with property fights. Ownership（ not property fight）is a bundle of fights.

关 键 词：对世 排他 追及 财产关系 所有权 物权 

分 类 号：D632.4[政治法律—政治学]