摘要
借款合同中以房抵债的性质存在争议。以房抵债不为物权担保行为,也不成立新的合同,更不是新债履行的合意,其也不为通谋虚伪表示。透过买卖合同的现象剖析其本质,可知"买卖"只是形式上的表述,其内容仍为借款合同的一部分。以房抵债是当事人关于借款合同违约责任承担方式的约定,是违约责任中的"继续履行"。基于这一"继续履行"约定,债权人有权请求债务人按照约定的责任承担方式偿还债务,但应当清算。
In the loan contract,there are disputes about the nature of using the house to repay the debt. It is not the behavior of real right guarantee,nor the establishment of new contract,nor is it the agreement of the performance of new debt,nor is it the expression of conspiracy and hypocrisy. Through the analysis of the nature of the sales contract,we can see that "sale" is only a formal expression,and its content is still a part of the loan contract. Paying off debt by house is the agreement of the parties on the way to bear the liability for breach of contract,and it is the "continuous performance" in the liability for breach of contract. Based on this "continuous performance" agreement,the creditor has the right to request the debtor to repay the debt according to the agreed way of responsibility,but it should be liquidated.
作者
郑海蓉
ZHENG Hai-rong(Fuzhou University,Fuzhou 350108,China)
出处
《哈尔滨学院学报》
2020年第9期77-82,共6页
Journal of Harbin University
关键词
以房抵债
担保行为
违约责任
继续履行
to pay off debts with house
guarantee behavior
breach of contract liability
continue to perform