物权公示对抗主义的统一构造  

The Unified Construction of the Public Adversarial Doctrine in Real Property

作　　者：叶金强[1] Ye Jinqiang

机构地区：[1]南京大学法学院

出　　处：《环球法律评论》2025年第2期5-22,共18页Global Law Review

基　　金：2022年度国家社会科学基金重大项目“我国民法评注编纂重大问题研究”(22&ZD205)的研究成果。

摘　　要：《民法典》中,物权变动公示效力模式采复合二元模式,公示生效主义与公示对抗主义并行。公示对抗主义的内在结构,应统一为“合意生效+公示对抗”模式。公示对抗主义的法律效果,系在信赖原理的指引下展开。交易第三人的保护,落入善意取得制度框架内解决;其他第三人的保护,则回到信赖原理并透过该原理的结构来实现。物债二分体系下,我国奉行统一的物权观念,不承认不完全物权概念。公示对抗主义之下,物权变动未为公示时,形成了公示之物权状态与真实物权状态不相一致的情形,这与公示生效主义之下可能出现的外观虚假状态相同。两种情形下,问题的解决方案也应一致,即依照信赖原理为善意第三人提供保护。基于共同价值基础,公示对抗主义与公示生效主义的法律效果也日益趋同。由此,简明的本土化、体系化的公示对抗主义理论得以形成。The Chinese Civil Code adopts a composite binary model of property rights changes, with the coexistence of the public notice effect doctrine and the public adversarial doctrine. While the legal effects of these two doctrines appear distinct in form, they share substantive similarities. The core efficacy of property rights is inherently tied to publicity: alterations to property rights that are not manifested through statutory modes of publicity cannot prevent the transfer of rights unsupported by the parties' intent, enabling third parties to acquire corresponding property rights. The intrinsic structure of the public adversarial doctrine should be a unified “consensual validity + publicity antagonism” model. The proposal that alterations to registered movable property rights follow a “consensus + delivery effect + registration antagonism” framework conflicts with the fundamental principles of property law and risks causing practical confusion. The modes of property rights representation must be consistent with the principle of singularity;dual or plural representation methods would lead to irreconcilable conflicts between rights represented by different modes. For registered movable property rights, the exclusive mode of representation is registration, and possession no longer serves as a functional indicator of property rights. The legal effects of the public adversarial doctrine operate under the guidance of the reliance principle. The protection of transactional third parties falls within the framework of the bona fide acquisition system, while the protection of other third parties is achieved through the structural mechanisms of the reliance principle. Heirs and tortfeasors, lacking meritorious reliance, are not entitled to protection;unpublicized property rights may be asserted against them. However, if a payment is made under the mistaken belief that the registered nominal party is the tort creditor, such payment may discharge the debt. The credibility of property rights representation mechanisms i

关 键 词：物权变动 公示对抗主义 复合二元模式 信赖原理 

分 类 号：D923.2[政治法律—民商法学]