摘要
我国《物权法》第202条仅规定了抵押权的行使期间,但并未明确地规定抵押权的存续期间,而考虑到抵押权的性质及现实需要,抵押权不能永续存在。国内外关于抵押权存续期间的立法模式不尽相同,但大都十分明确,具有分析及借鉴的价值。而各国立法模式对比之下,主债权诉讼时效届满,抵押权消灭的模式最为合理,更加契合我国的立法体系以及实践需要。
Article202of“The Property Law”only stipulates the duration of exercising the right of mortgage instead of the mortgage existing duration.While considering the nature of mortgage and the requirements of the reality,the mortgage can’t exist without a term.The legislation models of other countries and regions are different,among which the model that“right of mortgage should be exercised within the limitation of action for the principal creditor’s rights,or the real rights for mortgage will be eliminated”is the best,which is concert with the legislative system and practical needs.
作者
杨杰
张里安
YANG Jie;ZHANG Li-an(College of Law, Wuhan University, Wuhan Hubei 430072, China)
出处
《华北理工大学学报（社会科学版）》
2017年第6期16-19,共4页
Journal of North China University of Science and Technology(Social Science Edition)
关键词
抵押权存续期间
主债权诉讼时效
立法模式
实践需要
duration of mortgage
prescribed period for litigation for principal creditor’s right
legislation model
practical need
