划拨土地上房屋之买卖

Sale of a House on an Allotted Land

以划拨土地上房屋之买卖必然涉及土地使用权的转让,起诉前未经有批准权的人民政府批准办理土地使用权出让手续为由,认定房屋买卖合同无效,实属“下策”,应予改正。房屋买卖合同属债权合同,仅发生支付价款、转移标的物及移转所有权的债务之法律效果,在双方意思表示真实的场合下,解释合同应遵循“合同有效解释原则”。关于“地”的问题,依当事人的意思表示,可能会有不同的制度安排,其中,土地使用权一并转让,仅是其中的一种可能;除此之外,“地”的问题仍可依租赁权、地役权等方式解决。在当事人意思表示未予明确的场合,法院可以仅就“房屋”买卖合同进行审理裁判。仅在当事人就“地”的问题明确提出主张的场合,方才审理“地”的问题。即便不突破“房地一致”原则,对此仍应作“宽松化”的理解;当事人约定租赁权、地役权等,均可作为“地”权的依据。

It is not a good idea for judge to treat a contract for selling a house on an allotted land void,due to the parties have not obtained approval from government and paid transfer fees for the right to use land for construction before raising the law suit.A contract of sale is only a relative contract,giving rise to obligations to pay and to transfer of an object.Where a contract embodies the real wills of the parties and its content is not illegal and immoral,the interpretation of it should follow the“maxim ut res magis valeat quam pereat”or“the contract should be interpreted so that it is valid rather than ineffective”.As to the“land”under the house,according to the will of the parties,there may be multiple possible arrangements and transfer of the right to use the land for construction simultaneously with the transfer of the house from the seller to the buyer is only one possible solution,but it is not the only one.For the buyer of a house to use the land under the house,both lease and easement are two other possible solutions.Where there is no words as to the“land”under a contract of sale of house,the judge may only focus on the part of sale of a house.Only where a party makes a claim on the“land”,then the judge trails this part.Even following the so called“house and land together”principle,the judge still should take the contract seriously and do his best to interpret it valid.