担保物权司法解释起草中的重大争议问题  

The Significant Dispute Questions in Drafting the Judicial Interpretation on Security Interest

作　　者：高圣平[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学民商事法律科学研究中心 [2]中国人民大学法学院

出　　处：《中国法学》2016年第1期228-246,共19页China Legal Science

基　　金：作者主持的国家法治与法学理论研究一般项目"金融担保创新的法律规制研究"(项目编号:12SFB2038);国家社会科学基金一般项目"应收账款担保融资法律制度研究"(项目批准号:12BFX077)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：公司法定代表人违反《公司法》第16条的规定,越权为他人债务提供担保的,非经公司追认,担保合同对公司不生效力,传统法关于越权代表的相关规则并不适用于法定代表人越权为他人债务提供担保的情形。金融担保创新中属于人的担保的,应基于契约自由的原则,肯定创新模式的效力;属于物的担保的,在物权法定主义之下,不应承认其产生担保物权的效力,但应肯定相关合同具有债法上的效力。人的担保与物的担保并存时,应当承认保证人与物上保证人之间的求偿权。When a Company~ legal representative, in violation of Article 16 of Company Law 2005, provides security for others without the authority by the company, the security contract shall be null for the company if the company don＇ t subsequently confirm it. The traditional rules about ultra vires do not apply to the security contract signed by the legal representative without the authority by the company. When financial collateral innovation involves personal security, the innovation mode should be certainly effective based on the principle of contract freedom; when financial collateral innovation belongs to proprietary security, under the legal doctrine of numerus clausus, the innovation mode should not be admitted to produce the effectiveness of the proprietary security rights, but should definitely have the contract effectiveness. When the personal security and proprietary security co-exist, one security provider shall have the right to recourse to another security provider.

关 键 词：越权代表 公司担保 金融担保创新 独立保证 混合共同担保 

分 类 号：D923.2[政治法律—民商法学]