民法典时代抵押权存续期间之存废基于比较私法与私法史的考察

On the Preservation or Abolition of Mortgage Duration in the Era of the Civil Code A Study Based on Comparative Private Law and its Historical Evolution

民法典时代,抵押权存续期间在立法上扩张为登记担保物权存续期间,在学说中还有向所有担保物权甚至动产和权利担保类型扩张的趋势。在法典体系中,存续期间规则造成体系冲突与失衡。抵押权存续期间不是大陆法系的普适命题,而是混合继受下中国民事立法的局部经验。《民国民法》为了化解请求权因时效完成而消灭后抵押权无所依托的问题,首创抵押权除斥期间规则。当代我国台湾地区民法学说对该规则的解释论发生了转向,强调抵押人利益的维护,淡化了与时效制度的关联。我国内地民事立法借鉴我国台湾地区“民法”的过程中,忽略了规范的历史背景,并不断为抵押权存续期间寻找新的正当性基础。抵押权存续期间在利益衡量、经济政策等方面的正当性均不成立,应修改为债权人怠于行使权利时抵押人请求行使抵押权之规则。

In the era of the Civil Code,the legislative extension of mortgage duration to that of a registered security right,and the doctrinal expansion encompassing all types of security rights,including those over movables and rights,have created conflicts and imbalances within the Civil Code.The concept of mortgage duration,contrary to universal principles in civil law traditions,represents a distinctive feature of Chinese civil legislation within a mixed succession framework.The Civil Law of the Republic of China introduced the exclusion period rule for mortgages to address the challenge of mortgages lacking a basis after the expiration of the statute of limitations.Contemporary civil law doctrine in Taiwan has changed its interpretation of this rule,with an increasing emphasis on safeguarding the mortgagee's interests while gradually diminishing its connection to the limitation system.However,in the mainland's assimilation of Taiwan's civil law,the historical context of this norm has been disregarded,leading to an unwarranted expansion of the legitimacy of mortgage duration.From the perspective of interest balancing and economic policies,this approach lacks justification.Therefore,it is advisable to revise this rule and transform it into an enforcement mechanism for the mortgagee in cases of the creditor's negligence in exercising their rights.