《民法典》居住权规则适用的债法负效应及制度应对

Negative Effects of Debt Law on the Application of Residential Rights Rules in“The Civil Code”and the Institutional Response

《民法典》规定居住权制度以实现“住有所居”有其积极意义,但在物债二分的民法体系和与既有制度功能重叠等因素影响下,居住权规则会产生与租赁权之间的适用矛盾、挑战建设工程价款优先受偿权效力优先性及民事执行“空心化”一系列债法负效应。应对之策为:以订立合同的目的及期限为区分做出相应的政策指引是协调居住权与租赁权的有效方式;可参照预售商品房请求权与工程价款优先受偿权的关系处理与工程价款优先受偿权之间的冲突;对民事执行的负效应,债权人可以依情形向法院申请撤销债务人的非法行为。

“The Civil Code”stipulates that the system of residency rights is of positive significance in achieving“housing for all”.However,under the influence of factors such as the dual division of property and debt in the civil law system and the overlap with existing institutional functions,the rules of residency rights may generate contradictions in application with leasing rights,challenge the priority of the effectiveness of the priority right to receive compensation for construction project costs,and“hollowing out”a series of negative effects of debt law.The response strategy is to make corresponding policy guidance based on the purpose and duration of the contract,which is an effective way to coordinate the right to reside and the right to lease.The conflict between the right to request pre sale commercial housing and the priority right to receive payment for the project price can be handled by referring to the relationship between the right to request pre sale commercial housing and the priority right to receive payment for the project price.For the negative effect of civil enforcement,creditors can apply to the court to revoke the debtor’s illegal behavior according to the situation.