登记行为补助行为说之质疑——兼与刘保玉教授商榷  

Query on Assistant Conduct Related to Registration Conduct——Discussion with Professor LIU Bao-yu

作　　者：申建平[1] 

机构地区：[1]黑龙江大学法学院,黑龙江哈尔滨150080

出　　处：《求是学刊》2015年第3期71-79,共9页Seeking Truth

基　　金：黑龙江省社科基金项目"不动产登记制度研究";项目编号:12B077;黑龙江省教育厅项目"不动产登记制度研究";项目编号:12532246

摘　　要：《不动产登记暂行条例》公布实施,对于保障和促进我国市场经济体制在不动产领域的发展具有重要意义。但该条例并未明确登记机构登记行为性质。不动产登记作为一个整体,由当事人所实施的申请登记的私法行为和登记机构所实施的登记审查的公法行为共同构成。不能将作为公法性质的登记机构登记行为界定为民事行为中的补助行为。我国的不动产登记不能想当然解释为物权行为,从登记机构登记行为的性质、登记行为与补助行为的区别及补助行为功能角度分析,将登记机构的登记行为界定为补助行为,并不妥当。登记行为并非补助行为,并不影响登记机构因错误登记所应承担的民事侵权责任性质。Provisional Regulations on Real Estate Registration is published and is significant to guaran- tee and propel the development of real estate in our market economy. The regulations do not define the nature of the registration agency. As integrity, the registration consists of the private legal con- duct of the applicant for the registration and the public legal conduct of the registration agency with its registration and examination. The registration agency＇s conduct can not be defined as a kind of assistant conduct. The registration can not be explained as conduct of property right even against this theory. The nature, conduct, distinction of assistant conduct as well as the function of the regis- tration can not be defined as assistant conduct.

关 键 词：登记行为 补助行为 物权行为 

分 类 号：D923.2[政治法律—民商法学]