预告登记之破产保护效力研究

Research on the Effectiveness of Bankruptcy Protection in Advance Notice Registration

《物权法》第20条与《企业破产法》第18条存在价值取向上的冲突,一方面,考察《物权法》第20条的立法目的,预告登记应当具有破产保护的效力;另一方面,《企业破产法》亦应当为预告登记之下的请求权提供相应的保护。然而,我国两部法律均未提及预告登记的破产保护问题,由此导致在司法实践中相关案件的裁判呈现乱象。鉴于此,明确预告登记在破产程序中的优先保护效力,并对破产管理人的选择权作限缩解释,实有必要。预告登记的性质和目的决定了对其进行破产保护救济时应有别于破产法上的取回权与别除权制度。当企业陷入破产时,可根据破产申请受理、破产清算、破产重整与破产和解的不同阶段对预告登记的破产保护效力分别予以认定。

There is a conflict of value orientation between Article20 of the Property Law and Article 18 of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law.On the one hand,examining the legislative purpose of Article 20 of the Property Law,notice registration should have the effect of bankruptcy protection.On the other hand,the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law should also provide corresponding protection for claims under advance notice registration.However,neither of the two laws mentioned the issue of bankruptcy protection in advance notice registration,which leads to the confusion in the judgment of related cases in judicial practice.In view of this,it is necessary to clarify the priority protection effect of advance notice registration in bankruptcy proceedings and to give a restrictive explanation to the bankruptcy administrator’s option.The nature and purpose of advance notice registration determine that it should be different from the right of recall and right of exclusion in bankruptcy law.When the enterprise falls into bankruptcy,the bankruptcy protection effectiveness of advance notice registration can be determined according to the different stages of bankruptcy application acceptance,bankruptcy liquidation,bankruptcy reorganization and bankruptcy settlement.