检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
出 处:《海洋环境科学》2016年第2期311-315,共5页Marine Environmental Science
基 金:国家海洋局海域管理技术重点实验室开放基金项目(201405);辽宁省社会科学基金项目(L13BFX008)
摘 要:在我国现有法律框架下,将填海权概念固化为特定的法律概念并无益处。令填海权呈现为填海造地海域使用权,较之以行政许可方式设权,在体系性及对填海造地项目的把控方面更具优势。填海造地海域使用权与传统民法之"用益物权不能对标的物进行事实处分"理念并无本质矛盾。以填海造地海域使用权呈现填海权,实为明智且唯一的选择。Under the existing Chinese legal framework,there is no good to solidify the legal concept of the right of land reclamation. Compared with establishing right by administrative licensing,it is of greater advantages to present the right of land reclamation as the right to the use of the sea areas for land reclamation in terms of overall system and the control of the projects. Traditional Civil Law has the concept that usufructuary right cannot proceed with factual disposal of subject matters,which has no contradiction with the right to the use of the sea areas for land reclamation.Therefore,it is a wise and only choice to present the right of land reclamation as the right to the use of the sea areas for land reclamation.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.3