论融资租赁的担保交易化及其限度  

On the Use of Financial Lease as a Form of Collateral and Its Limitation

作　　者：张家勇[1] Zhang Jiayong

机构地区：[1]中南财经政法大学法学院

出　　处：《社会科学辑刊》2022年第2期76-85,F0003,共11页Social Science Journal

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目(20AZD119)。

摘　　要：融资租赁经济实质与法律形式之间的交互关系引发法律规制的难题,最典型地体现在融资租赁担保交易化的方式与限度方面。在典型交易结构下,融资租赁的融物功能附属于融资功能,具有担保交易的明显特征;但具体融资租赁交易因偏离典型结构而应归类为普通租赁。尽管担保性融资租赁与所有权保留买卖具有类似的担保交易特征,但不具有后者的取回权机制;在与动产抵押进行规范统合时,购置款优先权规则不适用于售后回租型融资租赁。在融资租赁合同失败的情形下,在因出租人原因致合同无效,或者承租人因出租人违约而解除合同时,租赁物归出租人所有,融资租赁担保功能应予否定;在因承租人原因致合同无效,或者出租人因承租人违约而解除合同时,融资租赁的担保功能仍应维持。The divergence between the economic essence of the financial lease and its legal form makes it difficult to regulate,especially with respect to the way it is used as a form of collateral and the extent to set a limitation thereon.In a typical financial lease,the function of acquiring a thing is incidental to the financing function,with its key feature of securing a loan,whereas a specific lease not typical enough should be classified as a true lease.In spite of the similarity between the financial lease and the retention of title,the former lacks the right to retrieve as in the case of the latter.Unlike chattel mortgages,the PMSI does not apply to“sale-lease back”,a category of the financial lease.In cases where the contract of the financial lease fails to be binding,its collateral function would cease to exist if the leased property belongs to the lessor,as the contract is void due to reasons attributable to the lessor or if the contract is terminated for the breach on the part of the lessor.In contrast,its collateral function should be maintained if the contract is void due to reasons attributable to the lessee,or if the contract is terminated for the breach on the part of the lessee.

关 键 词：融资租赁 功能主义 担保交易 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]