物权支配性之教义重述  

A Doctrinal Restatement of the Domination of Real Right

作　　者：袁野[1] Yuan Ye

机构地区：[1]武汉大学法学院

出　　处：《法制与社会发展》2021年第4期194-209,共16页Law and Social Development

摘　　要：《民法典》第114条第2款中的“直接支配”的通说释义存在混淆事实关系和法律关系的重大问题。意思支配仅指向事实层面人对物的利用关系,将其与“直接支配”绑定的做法误将创设物权之目的纳入了物权的内容,完全脱离了物权的法律语境。在事实和法律二分的语境下,法律上的“支配”教义的实质在于归属。物权归属既与物权法的基本功能相契合,又与“排他”教义紧密承接,原有的对“直接”教义的解释的缺陷亦可因此消除。《民法典》第205条中的“归属和利用”与人对物的事实支配相呼应,尤其要注意的是,该条中的“归属”教义与《民法典》第114条第2款中的“归属”释义之间存在本质区别。The general interpretation of“direct domination”in Article 114,paragraph 2 of the Civil Code has a major problem of confusing factual and legal relations.Domination of will is limited to the factual use relationship between person and object.To bind it to“direct domination”is actually a mistake in incorporating the purpose of creating real rights into the content of real rights,completely out of the legal context of real right.Based on the double context of fact and law,the essence of the doctrine of“domination”in law lies in attribution.The attribution of real right not only conforms to the basic functions of the real law,but also closely associates the doctrine of“exclusiveness”,and the defects of the original doctrinal interpretation of“direct”can be eliminated.The“attribution and utilization”in Article 205 of the Civil Code echoes the factual domination of people over things,and especially the doctrine of“attribution”in this Article differs substantially from the interpretation of“attribution”in Article 114,Paragraph 2 of the Civil Code.

关 键 词：直接支配 意思支配 利用 法律支配 归属 

分 类 号：D923.2[政治法律—民商法学]