“应当首先满足业主需要”的规范性质探究——《物权法》第74条第1款的解释论

Inquiry On the specifications of property Owners' s Necessity

《物权法》第74条第1款的规范性质不同于任意性规范,其不是对合同当事人的意思表示的解释或者补充,也不同于授权第三人规范,所涉及的利益不是特定第三人的利益,而是业主群体的利益,同时也得不出赋予业主撤销权的解释结论。按照强制性规范所规范的三种领域而言,《物权法》第74条第1款应当属于强制性规范,且属于其中的效力性强制规范。违反此种具体强制性规范的后果,须结合《合同法》第52条第5项的规定,当属无效。

The first clause of Article 74 of ＂Property Law＂ is different from arbitrary provision, it is not the explanation or supplement of the intention of the contract parties. And it is also different from third party authorization provision, the in- terest involved is not of the specific third party, but of the Owners＇groups. We can not explain this clause as authorization to the owners of the rescission right. For the three areas regulated by binding provision, the first clause of Article 74 in ＂Property Law＂ should be comprehended as a mandatory provision, more specifically a mandatory provision of effective- ness. According to item v in Article 52 of ＂Contract Law＂, the contract violating such a definite mandatory provision should be invalid.