所有权保留出卖人取回权论——形式主义与功能主义担保观的统合

On the Seller's Right of Recovery in Conditional Sales:The Integration of Formalist and Functionalist Security Concepts

《民法典》新规令所有权保留买卖中出卖人对标的物的取回权性质变得微妙。一方面,在旗帜鲜明的动产担保功能主义改革背景下,立法者与学界都力倡出卖人所有权向担保物权的转化;另一方面,《民法典》第642条第1款却未承认买受人有转让标的物或在标的物上为第三人再设定担保的权利,仍然从形式主义立场上认可出卖人所有权的归属功能。此种制度安排为形式主义与功能主义担保观在所有权保留中的统合提供了契机:在同时满足合同约定或法定解除情形以及《民法典》第642条第1款规定的诸类特定违约情形时,出卖人可以选择解除合同并通过返还请求权取回标的物,终局地回复所有权的完满状态;亦可不解除合同,基于《民法典》第642、643条之规定临时取回标的物,在买受人不予配合或回赎期间经过买受人未回赎时,通过担保物权程序就标的物变价求偿。两种可供出卖人选择的取回权模式下,所有权保留登记亦各自发挥不同的效力。

The new rules in the Civil Code make the nature of the seller's right to take back the subject matter in ownership retention delicate.Under the background of the prominent reform of emphasizing security interest functionalism,legislators and scholars advocate the transformation of the seller's ownership into a security property right.However,Article 642(1)of the Civil Code does not recognize that the buyer has the right to transfer the subject matter or set a guarantee for a third person on the subject matter,and still upholds the attribution function of the seller s ownership from a formalist standpoint.This arrangement provides an opportunity for the integration of formalist and functionalist guarantee concepts in conditional sales.When satisfying the contractual agreement or legal rescission situation as well as the specific breach situation stipulated in Article 642(1)of the Civil Code,the seller can choose to rescind the contract and retrieve the subject matter through the right of restitution,and finally restore the perfect state of ownership.Alternatively,the contract may not be terminated,and the subject matter may be temporarily retrieved based on the provisions of Article 642 and 643 of the Civil Code.In case the buyer fails to cooperate or fails to redeem during the redemption period,the buyer may seek compensation through the security right procedure.Under the two modes of repossession available to the seller,ownership retention registration also plays different roles.